City Council — Jan 10, 2024

Happy New Year. Good evening and welcome. The Wednesday, January 10th, 2024 City of Plantation City Council meeting is now called to order at 610. Ms. Beggaro, please call the roll. Councilmember Anderson. Here. Councilmember Andrew. Here. Councilmember Fadgen. Here. Councilmember Horland. Here. Councilmember Reinstein. Here. Mayor Thornton. Here. City Attorney's role. Here. Thank you. Thank you. Tonight's opening remarks and pledge allegiance resides with me and I invited Father Davis from St. Gregory's Catholic Church to lead us in the invocation. God of the universe, creator of all things, author of all that is beautiful. In this moment of reflection, we lift our minds to you and to holy and transcendent thoughts in awe of the grandeur of your good creation and of the privilege to be alive in this moment in time. How delighted we are to live in this beautiful city and to desire its forward progress for ourselves, our families, and for our fellow citizens. At the start of a new calendar year, it is appropriate to invoke your divine guidance and to ask for your blessing upon us as we begin anew our civic service to the community entrusted to our care. Your holy word in scripture reminds us that leadership is about being a good steward of our God-given gifts, abilities, and opportunities. May we always use them for positive ends and in so doing serve others well. May each of us have the skill sets necessary to effectively manage with wisdom the resources of your providence, to have virtuous, innovative thinking, to persevere in the face of adversity, and to have temperance and level-headedness in our collective discernment, always seeking to do what is just and right. May the integrity of our service be prompted by a humble disposition to lead with kindness, compassion, patience, and gentleness, especially mindful of the most vulnerable among us. Because our public service is oriented by your charge for the well-being of everyone in our city and making the quality of life here better for all, may our dutiful leadership be generously focused on causes bigger than ourselves, always seeking the common good of all. May such hopes and aspirations, even our lofty goals and plans, always keep in mind the social well-being of our community, the needs of those we serve, and the safety and protection of our people. As we seek common ground and unity, may our efforts always foster unity, bringing about the happiness and well-being of our neighbors. May your holy name be praised by what we do and say now and forever. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Father. God bless you. I invited some Boy Scouts from Troop 817 to lead us in the pledge. If they'd like to come on down, make sure the light's on. All right. May everybody please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. So before you guys leave, I was told you don't have any merit badges to ask us questions, but why don't you introduce each other and tell us your rank. I'm Alexander Escobar, and I'm a first-class scout in Troop 817. Great. My name's Alex Boz, and I'm first class. My name is Dylan Barfus, and I'm a first-class scout. Great. Thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate you leading us in the pledge. Thank you. Mr. Goodrich. Good evening. Phil Goodrich, Parks and Recreation Director. First of all, Happy New Year to everybody, and I want to say a special thank you to everybody who came out through the holidays and helped us out with our Santa's visit program. It was very well attended. It was a little bit of a challenging night. Got some sprinkles out there, but everybody persevered and got through it, and we did very well with the tracking this year as well. So I think we now have that under our belt, and we were able to move forward with that. So just a quick thank you that way. So upcoming events we have Saturday. This Saturday we have our Martin Luther King Day celebration. We'll be at Jim Ward Community Center from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Inspirational speeches, musical performances, games, and family activities. Saturday, the 13th as well, and Sunday, the 14th, we have the USTA Level 6 Junior Tournament going to be held at the Veltree Tennis Center. On Monday, the 15th, we have a Kids Day Off program that will be held at the Community Center from 7.30 a.m. to 6 p.m. That's for grades K through 5, $30 residents, $55 for non-residents. Friday, the 19th, we have Movies in the Park. Barbie will be being played. We're going to be having that at the Plantation Community Center this year. This event is free. No dogs, please. Gates open at 5.30. Movie begins at 6. Light snacks and drinks are available, but it is going to be for cash only. Friday, the 19th, and Saturday, the 20th, Plantation Swim Team Senior Qualifying Swim Meet will be held at the Aquatics Complex at the Central Park. Saturday, the 20th, and Sunday, the 21st, the USTA Golden Ticket Sectional Adult Tournament will be held at the Veltree Tennis Center. Monday, the 22nd, we also have another Kids Day Off program. It's back-to-back Mondays from school. That will also be at the Community Center, grades 5 through K, K through 5, rather. I'm sorry, the same fees apply. Sunday, the 11th, we have our Super Bowl Tailgate Mixer that will be at the Veltree Tennis Center. That's going to be a tennis event from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. Adult programs and athletic programs, we have registration is currently open for spring baseball and spring softball for the kids. And spring basketball does have a few spots available if anybody has any children from 13 to 17. There is a few spots left in that program. Monday night, adult kickball and Wednesday night, adult basketball also need a couple of teams. And if anybody would like to contact us, you can reach Melvin Johnson at 954-452-2507. Thank you very much. Thank you. Council Member Andrea has a question. Happy New Year, Mr. Goodrich. Happy New Year. Question, and it might involve Ms. Morris as well. Is there a bill that you're tracking currently in Tallahassee that would prevent us from charging non-residents a higher fee? Only utilities, not... Okay, because I thought I read some... May, Mr. President? If I may. Yes, Council Member. That was when I walked in here tonight, I was on the advocacy meeting, and I'll give an update on some of those things. The way it was related to utilities, and we don't have to worry about it, but it's utilities that sell water to other municipalities. And what's happened is they're looking at those interlocal agreements, and they're not just one-size-fits-all, because some municipalities will also have user fees in there for parks and rack and sports, and they're realizing that's how they offset. So it wouldn't affect us, but it would possibly affect some of those municipalities. Thank you. The only thing that we do have is anything that we purchased or developed under certain grants. Obviously, if it was a state grant, then we can't differentiate between the two, but we're well aware of those. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, public requests of counsel regarding municipal affairs. Those who wish to speak, we request that you complete a speaker form. If you have not done so already, please do. Please state your name and address, and please address your remarks to the council president, not the mayor or individual members of the council. Please keep your remarks to the allotted three minutes. And first up is Mr. Bolanos. Good evening. Thank you for this opportunity. My name is Ruben Bolanos. I reside at 6285 Pine Terrace. I've been a residence for the past 25 years. We are experiencing a series of bad accidents at the immediate corner of my residence. That's Holly Lane and Pine Terrace. As early as three weeks ago, we had a vehicle running to the tension wire that supports the pole. Prior to that, maybe four months ago, we had a vehicle driving to my neighbor's residence, going through the residence. We've had several cars drive into our driveway on palm trees. We have been protected by the palm trees. We had a car crashing to a palm tree and has left portions of the engine on top of the roof. So it's becoming a problem. We have young kids. And it is just during the last incident where the car ran into the residence, which is my neighbor, we were fortunate that nobody was in the residence at the time because for sure he would have killed somebody. I have tried calling traffic control at the number that I was given. It's a number that is unattended or they do not reply to the calls. I've actually gone into the police station and requested help from the traffic personnel, and nothing seems to have been done. But it's a real issue, and most of the incidents are tire marks on the lawn. But as I said before, there have been some serious incidents in the past. If we can look at any preventive measures to slow the traffic down or at least police presence, some of our residents do take that corner at, you know, ranging from 45-plus miles an hour on that turn. And people who are not our neighbors that show up in the holiday season particularly are at fault at taking that curve. You know, it's a dark corner, and I don't know what can be done, but I really want to bring it to your attention. Perhaps you could speak to Chief Harrison. He's in the back of the room. Okay. And he could get your contact information and hopefully come with a corrective action. Okay. I don't know what the right procedure is on a second item. The residence that was damaged during that incident that I mentioned that the car went through the residence is being half boarded up. We are getting a lot of curious people. Okay. You're saying it's inadequately boarded up at this point? It is adequately boarded up, but that doesn't stop people that want to get into the residence to be there. I've had several occasions where people drive out. This is your neighbor's house. Yeah. They drive out very fast when they are approached. I think Chief Harrison can help you with the boarding up problem, too, to make sure that the resident is going to fix the property because code enforcement is under the police department. Right. It's been four months with no action taken, and I know some of these homes get owned by corporations. Right. It's very hard to approach them. Sounds like we can get code enforcement out there to push them along. Who do I talk to? Chief Harrison. He's in the back of the room. He'll come up. Could you tell the address again, please, sir? Ruben Bolanos. It's 6285 Pine Terrace. The address is 6285 Pine Terrace. Okay. All right. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Mr. Conklin. Dennis Conklin, 4581 Northwest Six Court. Heavenly hosts protect you and your families. If I may approach 161 years ago, President Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation January 1st freed all the slaves in the states in insurrection and rebellion, I've given a copy for the record to the city. 63 years ago, President Eisenhower's farewell speech was January 17th. In that speech, he warned us everybody knows about the military-industrial complex. And in Section 4, he goes on further to warn about agency capture of basically the military and industrial complex towards technological, including that would be your pharmaceuticals and stuff like that. As you know, I read off 1,398 days of martial law where they shut down churches, they had mask-and-shot mandates, we lost our unalienable God-given rights. That's still under effect. They lifted the emergency order, but they did not lift the medical emergency. 521 days since the FBI invaded President Trump's home. That's a violation of his 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendment rights. 162 days since the arraignment of President Trump, violating his 1st Amendment rights to free speech. 107 days of no jury in New York State, 7th Amendment violation of his rights. 96 days of Hamas terror still going on today. And the IDF discovered Iranian guided missile factory in the Gaza Strip. You just can't make this stuff up. I've encouraged you to read RFK Jr.'s book, The Real Anthony Fauci. I've encouraged you to read the report that's been issued from the Pfizer documents, which they tried to seal, like the Kennedy assassination, for 75 years. You can get that on www.dailyclout.io. That's Dr. Naomi Wolf's site. Also, pay attention to www.brownstone.org. That's the Jeffrey Tucker site. What's been going on with this lockdown and everything else like that is addressed by President Eisenhower's farewell speech. I'll yield back my time. We've got somebody important here. Thank you, Mr. Conklin. Mr. Corman, did you want to speak for public? Legislative 13. Okay. I do not have any other sheets turning. Is there anybody in the chamber would like to speak? Mr. Hillier? Yes, thank you. For a council member Hillier. There you go. Sorry, about marring your product. Sorry. Yes, please. Here and then from this angle so that the benefit of the people can see that. And then here's the photographs, the precise ones for the members handed through the chair of the present badge. Please, thank you. Yes, please. And then this photo here because this is the same right here, please. Here, sweet. Okay. We'll jump. Okay. Well, it is what it is. Could you hold it just a slight? Thank you. One clear of the throat if you'd be so kind. It will be under three minutes. Good afternoon. My name is Lee Hillier, 1551 Northwest 115 Terrace, Plantation, Florida, 33323. I resided in Plantation Acres and have been here now come this May, was on May 1st of 1993. So it will be shortly 31 years and counting. Anyway, what my element for a lifetime mission has been for twofold. I am lucky because of World War II. I had two great Winnies. My first was Winnie Lacey, was my great grandmother who taught me all her knowledge. Moreover, she took care of Ike Eisenhower, Dwight, the head cheese, per se. Nonetheless, Mr. Conklin took a little wind out of my sail, but I liked his presentation. However, the second great person I knew was Winnie Lacey, who you have here in front of you. We were both licked at the hip, per se, in the sense that I've helped her assistant since I first moved into Plantation Acres and had the gift to help her out through her persons. However, this is about trying to get two poems at veteran parks in order to give her the designation of a poem, as well as one for myself, but into, moreover, my Winnie and Kinder as well. And I have poems then that I've given to, that are part of my larger information, is about the poems that I gave it, donated we, Leanne and myself, to Voltaire Park, where they're across the entire span of that area. I've donated hundreds to all of Broward County, as well, in the poems to help improve the communities each and every day. It's been a mission of mine, having been a veteran of Vietnam. So I have an expectation. I'm out of cover by protocol, but I'm trying to hope that my protocol won't slight me about it. However, as a Navy veteran, I think it's foremost for myself to help others get lift up. We are a team of called Pet Therapy, and we work for Cat Canine Assisted Therapy, as the finest in the United States here in Broward County. So we have that, that I have an extension with my dog, who's a service, as well as parently. We go to Covenant Village to help other people and give them more hope in their lives, which then goes back to Winnie, that someday I expect to be in heaven, and also beside by Mr. Fadgen as well, or Councilman Fadgen as well, because I think that there's some challenges that we have. I was a little bit sharper. Can I have one extension, one minute? Thank you, sir. Not whining, just facts are what faxes are. Roughly about five months ago, I had four consecutive strokes in a row, and I got a new pacemaker. I've had some challenges. I got the persuasive of God's benefit to help me go through chaff and challenges, both. And I do go back fondly to Sandra O'Connor, who I knew personally, as well as the Dutch known as, from Illinois, of Mr., or Mayor, excuse me, sir. Sartal is a life-saker in real life. I butchered his name. Life guard was also that text and saved many people in his mission. Then he became our president, one of the great ones, and I was at his library when he requested me. I was beside him. So that is how strong I am about my greatness of being in the awe of Sandra O'Connor, in case those who are not that versed about her capabilities. So that being the case, is that she had the Alzheimer's, and I've had family, that I was a nurse, that I've had 14 people, that I've left their hands to usher them to heaven. And that's the greatest gift I've had in my life. So that was a, excuse my councilman, bit of proud. Proud is different than pride. That's one of the seventh signs, according to our Bible. Nonetheless, thank you for your time being appreciated. I would like, if we could have this by Memorial Day, to get those palms there at Veterans Park in the fitting place for our great city of Plantation. Thank you. Excuse me. Are there any questions? I don't think we have any questions. I'll reach out to you. Please do. Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to make any public comments? Last call. Do I sign in yonder here at this thing? I think we're okay at this point. Okay. Did you get the photos? Yes. Okay. Terrific. Do you want them back? I don't know. Was I squared away? I don't know. Oh, please. Yes. Thank you. I'm keeping these, though. Come again? I'm keeping these, though. That's your personal. Yes. This is still in my mom's garage. I made signs. I'm quite pleased because Kathy's doing well because they were all there for June, who passed away at St. Gregory's, and I appreciate those who have shared her respects. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Hill. Juneau is a special one with the Popes. Public requests of the council regarding municipal affairs are now closed. I'm going to go to the consent agenda. The consent agenda consists of items 1 through 8 and may be approved upon motion. Does any member of the council wish to pull an item? I have the public, I have Dennis Conklin wants to pull number 8. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to pull an item on the consent agenda? Motion to approve items 1 through 7. Second. We have a motion and a second. Ms. Beggarow, can you call the roll? Who is the second, please? Council Member Reinstein. Council Member Horland? Yes. Council Member Reinstein? Yes. Council Member Anderson? Yes. Council Member Andreu? Yes. Council Member Fajan? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Conklin? Yes. Dennis Conklin, 4581, Northwest Sixth Court. I pulled this because, as you know, each year when we come up for the millage, I always ask that Gateway be exempted from its extra millage on top of what it pays, like everybody else, for their property taxes. But every time I pull up the back-up material for Gateway, I notice that there's always, like, over $1,000, $1,500, and whatnot for wastewater management and stuff like that. I mean, it's, like, every week. I was just curious. What on earth could they be doing with so much wastewater in that district? You look at it, for the year, it's $80,000, $100,000, something like that. It's always about $1,000, $1,500 a week. So I was curious what that's all about. It's been in the back of my mind, but I saw it was a light agenda, so I thought I'd bring it up. Thanks. I feel back. I would like to know, though. Good evening. I'm not sure what it is, but I will take a look at the bill lists, and I will contact Mr. Conklin and let him know what it is. Thank you. You're welcome. Mr. Polio, do you have a comment? You volunteering? You don't know what you want to do. Good evening. Happy New Year. Danny Polio, Utilities Director. There's portions of State Road 7 that we pay Broward County to treat sewage for us because we don't have the infrastructure that carries it. So we carry it west to the plant. So while we provide water services to different pockets out there, they treat the sewer for us, the sanitary sewer. So that's what that is. It's a monthly fee based on sewage treatment. And Mr. President, it looks like it was about $500 for the month. And it's not weekly. I thought I only saw it once out of these five weeks. There's different pockets. We pay Fort Lauderdale to do one section. We pay Broward County. So while I don't have the exact figures off the top of my head, I can get them for you. But that's what those fees are out there in Gateway. I'm sorry? Okay. Do we have a motion? Motion to approve item number 8 for Gateway. Council Member Horland seconded. Ms. Begaro, call the roll. Council Member Horland. Yes. Council Member Reinstein. Yes. Council Member Anderson. Yes. Council Member Andreu. Yes. Council Member Fajan. Yes. Thank you. Okay. Administrative items. Item number 9, hearing regarding the declaration of surplus and authorization of sale. I guess I have a couple questions regarding this. Do you want to say anything about it? Just this is one of the foreclosures we had. This was in response to about a $1.1 million accumulation of liens, complaints from area residents. And that's generally why we take action on something like that or criminal activity. There was a question earlier one of you asked. I think it may have been you, Mr. President, about how many fees we had into the property. At the time we got the judgment, there were about $11,000 in legal fees with some other ancillary charges. It was just under $15,000, which I think goes to another request you're going to make later. Okay. So one of the questions, when we put it up for sale, are we going to have a minimum bid that we're going to accept? Yeah, I was talking to Mr. Spencer about that. We'll probably set it around $225, $250. Okay. And then I spoke to you about this. Can we put a restriction on the sale? And this might be more of a question for City Attorney Ezraal, a restriction on the sale that whoever purchases the house, they either have to homestead it, to live in it, or buy it as an investment property for long-term rental, and short-term rentals would not be an option. I do that. Well, I discussed with Mr. Nunnemacher the deed restriction. Yeah. That's legally permissible. The only question that we had as an open issue was the duration, the minimum duration of a rental. A few short-term rentals traditionally are 30 days or less, right? Well, the way I was thinking about it, I was thinking about my association, they don't allow a lease that's less than, I think, six months. It might be a little bit more than that. So I was thinking if we put a deed restriction on it to say that a lease that's never less than eight months, I don't think that's unreasonable. Again, it's certainly up to you. I think it's within your legislative prerogative to make that determination. We don't know how, if at all, that will affect the value ultimately, but that's ultimately your decision. And I would like to get the consensus of my colleagues up here. And the way I was thinking about it is that we're not in the business of profiting off this. I'm concerned about just making sure that we cover what we have into it. And I thought you told me $50,000 we had into it. So you're saying about $15,000? Well, generally we spend between $20,000 and $50,000, depending on the complexity of it. But I wanted to go back and check the fees on this particular one. And I think because of the way this one had accumulated, frankly, the city attorney's office did a very quick and thorough job. So the legal fees were only about $12,000. And that's fine. I'm just really just concerned about recouping what we have into it, you know, and in the consideration of interest involved with that, I don't think at $15,000 someone's going to buy a house that they're going to want to renovate it, and we'll recoup what we have in it plus some. As we discussed, administration has no qualms with what you're requesting. So I don't – what does everyone else think, I guess, as Councilmember Robbins? I can't – yeah, I like it. I like that idea. It protects the residents and it – the purpose – Take a short-term rental off the rules. I don't think it will affect it negatively, the property by the negative. I don't either, not at all. I think it's a good tradeoff. I would even – say nine months. Okay. Say nine months. I'm okay with 12 months. I was okay with a year. Yeah, 12 months is – I mean, hopefully someone buys it to live in it. Right. But if – But I think we have to put that deed restriction in place. But I don't – yes. Right. We don't need another short-term rental on the market. Sure. And the worst-case scenario, so to speak, would be that if we're unable to sell it, the administration can come back to us that if they determine that some of those deed restrictions are the cause of being, you know, unable to sell it on the market, we could look at it. So we might as well put that restriction as strict and sufficient for our needs as possible. Okay. So I'll make a motion to approve with a minimum purchase – a sale price of $225,000 with a deed restriction of if it's going to be an investment property, leases, not less than 12 months. Is that – Do we need a motion, or can we just give consensus as an administrative item? I don't know. You tell me. And we've got y'all's direction. I would ask the city attorney, we do need to hold a public hearing on this item. Do we need to open that up before – Yes, you do need a – We do. This is – a public hearing is required. Again, if there's been a motion and a second, whoever is the maker of the motion and seconder, if you agree and there's no objection to the inclusion of the amendment, you do not need to vote on it unless you want to. I'll second your motion. Okay. So just for clarification, we're talking about a minimum lease of at least 12 months. Right. Understood. Do we take public comment on administrative items? This is – there is a required public hearing under the city code. Okay. Any other comments from the dais? Any comments from the chamber, Mr. Conklin? Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. Dennis Conklin, 4581 Northwest CIS Court, Plantation Park East resident. This has been such a headache, eyesore and everything. I just wanted to thank you. I was looking it up, and the property sold for $86,000 in 1993. And if you go online for the whacked out prices and stuff like that, not the real – what it would buy in the market, of course, because it's a wreck. $491,000 Zillow, $496,230 from realtor.com. So I think you'll be able to get your price, and I'm sure that anybody that puts up over $200,000, which is what you're asking for, they will want to not give it out to Airbnb, so to speak. Thank you. God bless. Thank you, thank you. Thank you from Plantation Park East. Any other comments from the chamber? Seeing none, Ms. Begaro, can you please call the roll? Council Member Horland. Point of order. I thought we were going to lean towards not calling the motion, and it was – I know you – I thought the city attorney said you can make the motion, but if the consensus was to act, then we didn't need to – it doesn't matter either way. Well, there was a motion and a second, so I'm assuming you're going to vote on the motion that's been made and seconded. But a motion wasn't necessary? Is that what you were stating before? A motion to amend would not have been necessary if the maker of the motion and the person who made the second agreed to the amendment. It's a friendly amendment. It would not require a motion to amend, but that's up to you procedurally. I'm ready to vote. Yeah. Okay. Ms. Begaro, call the roll. Council Member Horland. Yes. Council Member Einstein. Yes. Council Member Anderson. Yes. Council Member Andreu. Yes. Council Member Fajan. Yes. Thank you. So, item 10, discussion concerning a request to amend the permitted uses of the B-2P Central Business Zoning District to allow vocational schools. Mr. Holmes. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Members of the Council, for the record, Dan Holmes, Planning, Zoning, Economic Development Director. Item 17 on your agenda tonight is a use variant. And so, this item is associated with item 17, pursuant to section 27 and 53B of the land development regulations. Whenever a use variant item comes before the council, that section of the code requires that the council or the government body determine whether it wishes to amend the code as opposed to granting or reviewing a use variant. So, this item has been placed on the agenda in conformance with that section of the code. Staff has reviewed this based upon the locations of the various B-2P. Keep going. I'm trying to go as fast as I can. Based upon the various B-2P sections or districts of the city, our recommendation would be to move forward and to review this as a use variant. As opposed to amending the code. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. The question I had. So, it's a permitted use, but it's a conditional permitted use, right? No. Okay. So, it's not a permitted use under the code. Right. Okay. So, for use variances, whenever a use is permitted in a less intensive district, the code allows an individual property owner to apply for a use variance in, say, a more intensive district. The theory there is that if it's permitted in this less intense district, then it would not have any true adverse impacts in a more intensive commercial district. And so, it does permit them to apply for a use variance. So, what the code states is that whenever the council reviews a use variance, that it should consider whether it wishes to just do an overall amendment to the zoning district, to add that use to the zoning district, to add it as a conditional use within the zoning district, or to proceed and review the item as a use variance. So, what would be the negative impact of just allowing it, you know, making us an allowable use in that? So, what would happen is you'd have to take a look at the locations of your other B2P zoning districts within the city. We would then open that use up for a permitted use within those other districts. Right, but if we just make it permitted, so if they meet all the criteria, then they don't need to come to us. But if there's, like, a parking issue or something like that, they would have to come to us and ask us. Well, it's interesting you asked that question with regard to a parking issue. There is a parking issue associated with this use item, and they have to seek a variance for the parking. So, that is a separate item on the agenda. So, if there is a variance associated with it, then they have to also seek approval for the variance. See, I've just been going back and forth in my head. It's like, we don't have to make an agenda item if we made this a permitted use, but what's the rationale by making them come to us? Because, should it just be a permitted use? And I guess I'm not fully familiar where all these areas are. So, the B2P districts, and perhaps I should have provided a map, I can tell you some of the areas that I know off the top of my head are B2P districts. I know the Mercedes Plaza area in the city is B2P. The shopping, the Jacaranda Square shopping center at Plantation, I'm sorry, at North Pine Island and Sunrise is B2P. The town center where the Publix is located is the B2P, the shopping center across 70th from there is B2P. And, of course, this site, which is located along Brow Boulevard, just near Central Park. It's where the gas station is. Right, right. Okay. It's B2P. We don't, those are, and there's one other one that is located on Sunrise near State Road 7. So, just as you turn off State Road 7 going west on Sunrise to the north, there's some commercial area there that's B2P as well. Councilmember Andreu. Okay. Yeah. So, here's the zoning map. Which colors? This is busy. Okay. Let me. Name that color. Okay. So, it's this color right here, right here. So, this is all B2P. That's B2P located there. If you come down, I think I'm going to have to go down to Broward. This area here is B2P. This is the site that's in question, B2P, and then along Sunrise over there, there's B2P located there as well. Mr. Holmes, this was where the veterinary office was, correct? This is where the nail spa, the toy nail spa. This is actually the same owner. Oh, okay. All right. So, I'm speaking of the exact bay. The exact bay that's in question here is where the nail spa was located. But, yeah. Okay. So, Lakeside Veterinary is located in that plaza as well. Okay. And correct me if my memory is incorrect, but in the past, I thought when we had these items, they did not come as administrative. I'm not sure if they were legislative, but I don't remember the last time we had something similar being administrative. And, again, I think to kind of the conversation we had about item nine, we made a motion and voted it up or down. Right. So, typically, as I recall, I thought it was all of them were administrative. I have to go back. We don't do them that often, so I don't remember off the top of my head. But, yes, you would vote it up or down as to whether you want to amend the code or to proceed with reviewing the use variance. Okay. For some reason, I don't remember it being under administrative items. But, and also, typically, not that we have to do that this evening, based on what President Fadgen said, but in the last three years at least, I think we've always denied these and then waited and discussed it during the quasi-judicial portion of the meeting. So, I won't make a motion right now because I think other people might have comments. But, that is what I would suggest, that we don't approve item number 10 as is and then wait for quasi-judicial. Thank you. Council Member Horland. I think I'm a little confused. So, basically, are you looking for consensus? Because we're talking about whether or not we want to consider making this, making a change in the code or just continuing to grant use variances for this type of use. Okay. Correct? Is that what we're? Correct. Okay. Because what I was going to weigh in and say is I prefer to keep it as a use variance. I like the discretion that council has in this instance. So, that would be where I would throw my vote if we're going to vote. But, I thought we were looking for a consensus on this. I want to clarify this. And then we get to the item later. And then we get to the item later. But, you're just asking, are we interested in changing the code or continuing with variances? Right. As the code requires, we have to go through this first step to see if there's an interest in amending the code. If there's no such interest, then we would hear the item. I'm not interested in amending the code. Council member Anderson? If you're looking for consensus, I feel the same way. I would rather come to us each time. It's only a few things, case by case. Right. Not amend the code. That's my two cents. I think I'm in agreement with that. Okay. All right. So, we will further this. We will not change the code. We will not bring a code amendment back. And we will further discuss this matter under item, I think it's 16 and 17. Okay? Thank you. Okay. Item number 11, advisory board and committee discussion. Good evening, council members. City council has expressed some comments about how our board and committees operate over the last year during the course of several meetings. And as Michael Albert is coordinating our city code rewrite process, because it's actually a great time to take a comprehensive look at our board's rules, procedures, how our boards are composed, and get your feedback on what you think is working well, the way it is, where would you like to try a different approach. That way we can codify what you think works best and give clear direction to our boards so that we can operate as effective as they can be. So, I just wanted to thank Michael for leading this effort and let him take the lead on this. Good evening, council members, city attorney, mayor, city clerk, Michael Albert, assistant director. So, discussion at recent council meetings, especially, particularly the one in December, during 2023 regarding the functions of the various boards and committees and the council appointments to them, has resulted in staff preparing an outline for council to clarify and establish more formalized procedures and duties for all of the boards and committees. So, staff and the council have identified several areas for discussion, and we can go through them each at all ends of the slide, and we can have the discussion on each. So, codification of all active boards and committees. Some of them are in the code, but most of them are not in the code. Updating requirements for all these boards and committees, the terms of office and specific requirements for membership for certain ones, the use of alternates, and whether or not you want to expand the membership on any of these. So, not all the boards and committees are mentioned in the code. AHAC in Chapter 2, Sustainability and Resiliency also in Chapter 2, Planning and Zoning Board in Chapter 27 have fairly detailed requirements and procedures. Some are mentioned but do not have substantive information. Some are not mentioned at all. Staff proposes to enhance the section of the code in Chapter 2 to include information for each board and committee as part of the adoption of the new Chapter 1 administration coming to a dais near you. Okay. So, that's the first one, if anyone has any thoughts about that. Nation? You were asking about increasing the memberships? Yes, but that's another slide. Okay. So, in terms of whether to codify the boards and committees that are not currently codified. Okay. I'm in agreement as well. Okay. Agree. Great. Updating requirements, including residency, the minimum amount, any exceptions, and the maintenance of residency. And I'll give an example. Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, they're not in our code right now. They're not required to be residents because sometimes you don't have a certain expertise, and it might be somebody that has that expertise that lives in another city. Midtown is another one where there are business owners. They may not live in the city, but they have businesses in the city, so those types of things. So, business owners or property owners? I believe it's business owners. Okay. Because somewhere along the line, I thought that Gateway and Midtown, we had to get the consent of the property owner if there was a business owner that wanted to serve on, like, Midtown or Gateway. And maybe I picked that up, and I think we – I think City Attorney Ezra all looked into that, and he said no at the last meeting, but for some reason I thought that was – I'd have to look back. I don't know off the top of my head. I guess I kind of lean towards – I think that the membership for Gateway and Midtown, and now that there's housing going into both of those, you know, obviously the residency is a sufficient criteria. But I think that if it's a business owner, it probably should have the consent of the property owner for them to represent their interests because, you know, they pay the taxes through the rent, but the property owner is the one that, you know – Right. So – And I think both of those boards were approved by resolution, which is why they're not in the code. So if you wanted to codify that type of thing. And then when you say minimum amount, you're talking about the minimum tenure in a city? Yes, and typically that's one year. I think the same criteria for running for office have established residency one year? Yeah, that's typical. And then maintenance of residency, what do you mean by that? So if they're required to be a resident but they leave the city, they need to resign. So we've had a few cases of that last year with Planning and Zoning Board. I think two members moved out of the city, and so they resigned. They kept serving? No, they resigned, actually, and we got replacements. Okay. Well, there's nothing we have to discuss with the maintenance. It's – you'll figure it out, right? Okay. Yeah. President Feig. May I? Yes. Sorry. Only in terms of the – with consent of the property owner, I would just ask that it's a property owner or agent of the property owner, only because I've seen that there are some essentially absent property owners, so you have tenants that don't ever speak to the property owner. I'm okay with that if they have the authority to – Right. If they have the authority to speak on behalf of the property owner. Yes. Okay. I think that's a great addition. I agree. I concur. We have that issue a lot. Okay. And then – And I want to call some of these pension funds. And then so in Chapter 2 right now, in Section 231, 232, there's a whole section about boards and committees, and then the next two sections talk specifically about only AHAC and sustainability. But there are – a lot of these are issues that are already codified. So if we wanted to replicate that for all boards and committees, we could certainly do so where there aren't any exclusions already. Okay. Attendance and quorum and resignation of members. I can tell you for the two boards that I am the liaison for, we've had – we've struggled with quorum on occasion. Planning and zoning board has, of course, has alternates. And so since we got the seventh alternate, we've been pretty good this past year. We've had, if not the full dais, we've had – we've met – more than met the quorum. On AHAC, it's been a little bit of a struggle. Currently, there's one vacancy. We have eight members. So three absences would put you right at the minimum, and it has been a little bit of a struggle. I think I had informed the council previously that perhaps expanding the membership on AHACs, which would increase the chances of meeting the quorum, might be a good idea. And perhaps you could do that as with appointing alternates. Again, meeting the specific criteria, obviously, I believe it was – in the code, it's nine members, because we can't really fit 11. But the state statute allows you 11. Why don't I have to meet here? Perhaps you want to add two alternates, and that would help us always have a quorum. The meeting doesn't have to be here if we went to 11. It could be in somewhere else. I think it works well. Regarding the alternates, I think right now the alternates replace the appointee's main person, right? Yes. And I think I brought it up – I know Mr. Corman's brought it up – that I think that having the alternate be able to fill any position was some sort of fair rotation. So if alternate one comes at all the meetings, and then they serve at the previous meeting, and then alternate two happens to be at the next – they're both there, well, then alternate two gets their chance. Yes. I don't know how to write that up. We actually are going to talk about alternates on a future slide, but I will tell you that the planning – I'm sorry. I do. Before we get to alternates, I did want to comment on attendance. I know that some of the boards, if not all the boards, have – if you missed, I think it's three in a row, that there's some have, I think, an automatic – you're forced off the board, or it's three or four. And, you know, my thought there is that, you know, while there are, I believe, some exceptions, and you can request maybe a vote of the board, I think it's incumbent upon the – those council members that are appointing their member to be on top of that when we get that information. I'm not really sure that an automatic – I mean, there are times where you don't fit into that category of you were sick or your spouse was sick or – I mean, it's a very small category. And sometimes it's work, and there may be work, two meetings in a row, and then a sickness, and then you would automatically be off. I just think that as long as we keep – we continue to get this great feedback and updates regarding whether the attendance, then we know if our appointee is not showing up. And it seems to go towards the – maybe it's the later discussion as to whether or not the terms of office is at the pleasure anyway of the appointing council member. So I just throw that out there in terms of that. I kind of think – well, Council Member Andrea. I was along those lines, Council Member Reinstein. I was wondering if we could say maybe unexcused attendance so that if they weren't contacting the chair, if they weren't communicating with their council member or something, then maybe. So I don't know if that – That helps with quorum, too, to ensure in advance that that makes sense. Council Member Horland. I'd like to go back to expanding. Are you ready for that to talk about expanding? That's actually the last slide. Okay. Because I do want to – I'm excited, Council President. I want to get there. I want to talk about expansion. I hear what Council Member Andrea and Council Member Reinstein are saying about the attendance. I kind of feel like maybe it needs to trigger a conversation at this part of the meeting at the council meeting regarding – so that it actually compels the council member to talk to – because I don't think we're – I know that I talk to a bunch of my appointees, and there's a couple that I don't talk to very often. But then I see them, so I don't know. I – it's all about the quorum. That's what the whole issue is. Yeah. And when I make an appointment or I'm reappointing my appointees, I call every single one of them, and I thank them for serving, and I ask them if they're willing to do it again. And the only thing I ask of them is to speak their mind and to show up. You know, and obviously, like Council Member Reinstein said, sometimes things happen, but if you've got work, work, sick, you know, that might be saying that you can't commit to the way – you know, obviously things happen, but there's other people that want these opportunities. We regularly get applications. So I don't know necessarily – I think there needs to be some – I see you. I'll call you in a second. Well, I don't see you. I see Council Member Horland. I'm kind of conflicted on that. Council Member Reinstein. I think I understand that position, and I think maybe that goes back to the – they serve at the pleasure of the appointing Council Member. And so I do agree that notifying your board and notifying the board liaison in advance helps ensure quorum so nobody's time is wasted. But the mandatory – I think some of the basis for being excused is too restrictive. And so that if you call in advance, say I can't be there, and you've met that time period, then we have to trust our appointees. And if you don't, if you feel that they're not acting accordingly or missing too many, then they serve at the pleasure of the appointing Council Member. So that's my only concern. I just wanted to add, to give you an example, Planning and Zoning Board, of course, has alternates, and Danny and I encourage them to come even when the dais is full. Because sometimes maybe somebody has – you know, they can't make it for work or something like that, gets stuck in traffic. So then we wait a little bit, and then they can serve on the dais, and that way we continue the motions. I think that would – you know, particularly for planning and zoning, it's kind of – it would be beneficial to the alternates to actually come to those meetings, even if they're not expecting to serve. If there's a possibility they're going to serve because someone's not going to be there or someone doesn't show up unexpectedly, I think that would be beneficial to that board. And we typically have two or three of them that are in the audience. But then the other – you made me think of something. And so if we did that rotation with the alternate and then the person came up, you're late, you're out, or you come in and then the alternate's out. Like, I guess that's something that we would kind of – I would think we need to define to prevent an argument. Councilmember Horland. I just want to throw something out because I hear what all three of you are saying. I like the number three, but I think maybe the language is too harsh. So I did have a situation on P&Z where there was a family member very sick, so I had to do a rotation. I would not have want to have lost that person permanently. So what if it – rather than it be an automatic that you're kicked off the board, that it may be subject to removal? Because, again, it's going to be up to us. So perhaps if we have that three in there – I think I've been in other topics. I'm not for easily removing somebody, you know. But I think if we change the language, perhaps we'll all find a comfort leverage there? Okay. But I think that something to trigger a conversation – Well, and I will say, while we're on this topic, I think that this council has been very responsible. I've seen, you know, in the past where some advisory board members were not held accountable, and I think that it's helped that Ms. Begro has kept us so well-informed, and with the new management software, I think it's been better for all of us, and it's better for the boards as well. But I think that we're staying on top of it. I think with the less harsher language, possibly saying some of the fact that the council may be able to make some sort of representation at the following council meeting, saying that they spoke to their appointee and they have a – they can make the representation saying that it's life. So I think it may lead to termination, at least the option's in there. Okay. Mr. Alpert can work on the line. I'm sorry, Danny was saying something to me. That – it doesn't have to be necessarily the same thing for each board, because, you know, planning and zoning board obviously is a quasi-judicial board. It has a little bit different functions, so it's pretty much up to the direction of the council and the way you want to codify it. I think the consensus is harsher – less harsher. Yeah. You're out if you're 10 minutes late. But keep it consistent. Keep it consistent. Across the board. Okay. Back in October of 2022, Carol Morris gave – spearheaded the presentation where each board chair or in their absence of vice chair came up and talked about what the board did the past year, what they want to do the next coming year. That's actually coming up. But we wanted to know if you wanted to make that an official process with the annual update. I do. I don't think it all has to be in one night. It can be broken up. But I think it's important that they see us and we see them. And I think it adds importance to what they're doing. Valued. Councilmember Reinstein. I just wanted to agree with that. I came about that for credibility. The more we know that we appreciate and we value the attention, we'll see even more. I concur. Quarterly attendance reports of members. I think we're already doing that, but if you wanted to make that official. So if you wanted to specify for each type of board, any procedural rules, rules of decorum, quasi-judicial, Roberts rules of order, again, that's defined for the planning and zoning board. I don't believe it might be applicable to sustainability. I'm not entirely sure. But if you wanted to do specific, not quasi-judicial, that's planning and zoning, but if you wanted to do any other requirements for any of the other boards or all of them. I would say procedural rules and rules of decorum and Roberts rules should be consistent across all boards. It's not working. Try it. There we go. Go ahead. I agree with Council Member Horland about the need for the rules decorum and so forth. My only question is to ensure that if we do include a requirement for Roberts rules of order for every one of the boards, that whoever is the liaison is familiar with Roberts rules of order. I don't know whether they are or they're not, but if it is going to be used, then you need to make sure that somebody is familiar with it. Yes, and we'll work with the city attorneys, obviously. It's a little bit different for planning and zoning board with quasi-judicial, that there's the whole standard of procedures that we have for that. So if it's applicable to other boards and committees. And it may not be necessary for all the boards. I mean, an educational advisory board, I think, works very well with having it a little more. Can you use it as a framework? Sure. Yeah. Sure. Okay. I just wanted to jump in here. There were several circumstances when council had discussions about how to empower our boards at the meetings, at the strategic planning, and this is the recommendation that's meant to address it. We want to make sure that then boards come up with ideas, especially if they need support from staff, if they need a budget, if they need city resources, that we have a process that will make this a reality. So, for example, recently the educational advisory board on their Monday's meeting made a recommendation for the council to consider partnership with Russell Education Foundation. So the mayor is on it already. I think he's very excited. But we're looking to put a formal procedure that lets the boards know how they can make things happen. And they're not, you know, they're not pigeonholed into a $1,000 budget or whatever we were potentially discussing at one point, you know, but they can actually make big things happen with council support. So this is meant to do that where we would, if the board would make a recommendation, then administration would bring it to city council to discuss. And then based on the council's discussion and direction, administration would work with appropriate departments to evaluate if the programs are feasible, what would be required funding, what would be required staff commitment, and properly budget for those programs or initiatives under appropriate department's budgets. But attending some of these meetings, you know, when they're asking for funding and such like that, it seems like what we need to do with our liaisons is get them on a timetable that if they are going to request something that needs funding, I'm not for just giving them a blank budget. I think they need to propose something. I can't think of an example right now. But we need to give them a timetable saying this is when you need to discuss. This is when you're going, this is, you need to organize this so when you, you're in the budgeting window, because I think last year, I forget what board it was, what's that? EAB, there was a couple others. They missed the boat. We were already pretty much, I mean, administration was probably already finalizing the proposed budget. So the idea is because the boards are serving in advisory capacity, so that's their role. So the idea is to kind of marry what we do as a city and their- Well, I think we need to give them the framework and the timeline in order to make that proposal. Absolutely. Because I'm not forgiving the advisory board's budgets, but I've made the statement that if someone brings up a good idea, we're probably going to fund it. Correct. So, Council Member Reinstein? Correct. And the idea is that would be done through the regular budgeting process, and you're absolutely correct about that time frame versus the board process. And along those lines, it also, depending on what board's bringing it up, also might dictate where the budget request is going to, what department the budget request is going to come through. So, Council Member Reinstein? Yeah, I was only thinking that in terms of the requirement that it's a thoughtful request and it's fully vetted and thought out as maybe some type of economic impact statement, I mean, some type of singular form that is a simple form that each board's required as part of their request for funding. And that may, you know, help fine-tune that request for us. Absolutely, and it would be a collaboration between the boards and administration and city departments because a lot of times, again, we have experts within the departments that would help define those programs and identify what the needs are, what the challenges might be. Okay. So, terms of office, shall they be appointed or reappointed annually, or should the term be coincident with the appointing council member's terms subject to the pleasure of that council member? My opinion is, annually, it makes, at least from my perspective, it makes me reach out to them, speak with them, ask them if they're willing to commit for another year, because there's opportunities to have people serve or haven't served, and if you wait for the term of the council member, that's a long time. It flies by, but it's a long time. It was just yesterday. We were sworn in. May I jump on? I'm sorry. Council Member Reinstein. I agree with the need to have it less than coinciding with the appointing council member's term, but I like the idea of subject to the pleasure of the council member, where that if you want them to serve a shorter time than annually for whatever reason, it's the same reason that you may want to make a change sooner versus later. Well, I was looking at the term, not necessarily saying I could not remove them after three months. That's my pleasure. But the term is for us to formally reassess whether we're going to give them another year to serve. That's how I'm looking at it. Council Member Andrejo seems to be agreeing. That's fine. You know what? So whether it's annually, as long as they're always serving at the subject of the pleasure of the council member during that annual term. It can be removed at any time. Yeah. And I think it will still state that, correct? Yes. Subject to the pleasure. Yes. Okay. You had it as a separate item. That's why I thought you were identifying it as a separate category. Well, I assume, we assumed actually you all would probably go for annual, but just for discussion purposes, just the thought was out there. And then how does this relate to? I'm sorry. Council Member Andrejo. Oh. It was for the second bullet. Okay. Say your point and then she wants to speak. So how does this relate to rotating members and alternate members? Council Member Andrejo. So I personally don't like the rotating members. I wish we could move to, I don't like the rotating. You know why? I had one situation where the person that, it was my year and they were involved, they enjoyed serving, and then that was it. That year was up and they had to get, basically, you know, they had to resign because it was moving on to the next person. I prefer the boards where we have a consensus and we proffer a name together and bring someone forward. I know we have both. I have, right, it's been a mixture of those two designs. But the rotating seat, it's difficult sometimes. And I prefer the rotating seat because when we do it as a consensus, it's not really done as a consensus. The name's brought up. There's no, you know, I trust the people that have been brought up, but I don't know who they are sometimes. I don't know their credentials. I can't remember the specific person. What? We get their application as part of it. Well, it seems like sometimes the name's brought out of the air, and then, you know, maybe you and Council Member Horland know the person and, oh, they're wonderful and blah, blah, blah. I'm just saying that that's how I look at it. And you don't trust our judgment? What's that? And you don't trust our judgment? Well, I voted for it because I don't want to be the stick in the mud. But I think the rotating, I make it very explicit that I'm appointing you as the rotating member, and your term will be up at the end of the year, and befriend the next Council Member has to be the rotating person. So I understand what you're saying because it's a frustration of mine as well. But how about if, you know, I don't know if we need to write it in there, but it would be a nice, friendly, we just had the situation on AHAC where I had the rotating, and I was so thrilled that you kept my appointee because he's phenomenal. I did threaten you. No, but I think, you know, perhaps it's something that we, before we make the appointments, if you have somebody you really like that we're able to have that discussion, you know, this person has served, they've attended, and could you please give the consideration to keeping them? Maybe, since we make these appointments in January, maybe what we need to do is have a conversation of the rotating people on the boards, saying that, Council Member Horland, you're going to have the PNZ, this is the current rotating one, you don't have to reappoint that person, but there could be a discussion. And you're talking about, what, Matt Rosen? I'm not going to, I'm not going to, he's your appointee, you better know his name. No, I know, but I had a conversation with him, a very good, Mitch, Mitch. I had a very good conversation with him, and I wanted to reappoint him. So that, I understand what you're saying. But I think, I think to both of your appointments, you may not know that appointee, so since we do appoint in December now, I'd like to have, it's December. I'd like to have that conversation. Oh, that's right. We appoint in December. I think that, I think it would be the appropriate thing to do, to have the conversation with the council, because there may be somebody that we really think has been terrific. We'll then have that conversation in November. Correct. Before the appointee. Correct. These are our rotating. Yes. Because there are some great people to Jennifer, to Council Member Andrea's point, that we don't want to lose. But I do feel that, no matter what, when you're appointing the rotating, you need to inform that they are the rotating, and someone else is in charge of that appointment. Council Member Reinstein. You know, in listening to some of the discussion, I had thought that, frankly, if somebody had the rotating member and wanted to give up that rotation, trade it, or allow somebody else to make the choice, other than just making the choice for them, some kind of option like that is that we all have a rotating member, but if you choose to not utilize it, then somebody else could. I like the idea of it being a rotating member. Along what you're saying, I think that about the group, if someone has the rotating, they don't really have someone in mind, then we... Exactly. Okay. Okay. We confuse you enough? No. All right, because I am. I agree. Okay. So, specific requirements, so certain boards, such as AHAC and unsafe structures, have specific statutory requirements for their members with respect to their professional experience or discipline or licensure or academic training. Most of the boards and committees do not. So, if you all had any thoughts about the other boards, if there were any specifics that you wanted to codify. And I will add that Planning and Zoning Board currently has recommendations in the code for desired professional experience, particularly those with land use design and construction experience. Councilmember Horland. Thank you, Mr. President. This is the one that I want to speak to. I think there was a concern at one point that we didn't have enough resident voices on Planning and Zoning, and I think that is the board where we need to make sure that we have a balance, because it does say that in the code. I think at one point, Mr. Alpert was my appointee, who was a planning professional, and my rotating was a landscape architect. And I think that that brought a lot of value to the board at that time. So, while we have some... We have great voices in there, I don't know whether that... I'm not really talking about expanding that board, but I do think that that is a board because it's quasi-judicial, we need to make sure that we have a good balance on there. So, I would be for enforcing some of that... Are you specifically talking about planning and zoning? Some of those desired professional planning and zoning. See, what I'm concerned about, if we put specific professional background experience on there, sometimes there's already a perception that the board or the council is too complicit with the applicant or the developer. And I think that, I think it's incumbent on us as the appointers to make sure that we're putting people in that want to put the time in, because it is complex, it's tedious, and you really have to have a desire to do it. If you're not willing to put the time in there, you should not be on planning and zoning, because the applicants are coming with people that they're paying a lot of money to be there. But I would be concerned that the residents would be concerned that if we have someone that has a... I actually got an email today regarding AHAC, that they feel like there's two developers on there, there's a realtor on there, and are they really doing what's best for the needs of the people that need affordable housing, or are they doing what's best for their professional background? I don't think there's any reason not to appoint someone, like your example with Mr. Alpert, when he was not an employee of the city. But I'd be concerned that having a specific professional background designation would possibly lose the trust of some residents. And some residents can be a very small minority, but they can be a very loud minority and influent and derail things that should be approved. So I think we're talking two different boards, so AHAC is set statutorily. Well, I'll just use that as an example. Right. I'm thinking of planning and zoning. And I agree. We all received that same email today, and I think that's one of the reasons that, to Mr. Alpert's point, that board should be expanded, because I think it will make it a little bit easier for us to get some of those other professions on there. And I don't know that I want to – But how would that go about – Let me address P&Z. I think we can go too far in one direction or the other, and I think we've seen that on P&Z where we had actual developers that were sitting on that board. I think I would just like the council to be more mindful, and perhaps when we're looking at resumes, to make sure that we have a blend. And I think it should be a healthy blend on there. I just – That's my opinion for planning and zoning. And I'm specifically – And I think there should be some professional expertise on there. I'm specifically talking about planning and zoning as well, and I really feel that you just put the person on there that is willing to do the work, and there's work involved with planning and zoning. But how would – then you have the ultimate rotation, because how would that appointment work? That's a consensus appointment. Then we're – then there's a heavy hand from the council being put on there. If we're going – let's just say that the consensus of the council is the one that's going to put that professional background, personal, and planning, and zoning through a consensus, or if it's going to be a rotating thing. I'm thinking of the – what's that board? The unsafe structures board that fortunately doesn't meet, but it's just like I really don't like who I have to appoint because that's a hard discipline. I don't think we should make it tougher. I think we should make it with the alternate discussion that we're talking about that some more people can participate so that the alternates can be in there, and then make sure that we're putting people in that want to put the time in. Mr. Mayor? I agree very strongly with Council Member Horland. It's a level of expertise that is really necessary, and boards are created to drill down deeper on things. And if they have the advantage of having seen it from a certain set of eyes, I think that's really good. That said, every now and then there are some exceptional members of the public who do do the work and study their tail off. But I think I would like to see a couple more professionals on there right now, if I had my way. Council Member Reinstey? The need for more professionals is understandable, and I think for all of the boards, we want people who not only have an interest in serving but have some type of background that fits the board so that whatever they're offering, whatever opinion they're offering is helpful, right, that actually assists the board. But I am concerned that, you know, the more we limit the requirements or narrow or structure these requirements, the more difficult it will be to find people to fill the spots. And so I think that if we feel strongly about needing more professionals in a certain area, then it becomes more incumbent upon us to find those people to fill those spots. So it's, you know, I think it accomplishes the same goal. It just doesn't limit us in case we can't find that person. Okay. And I completely agree. I don't believe that it needs to be as stringent as AHAC is, but I think it's something used. Education Advisory Board is a perfect example. I think we all seek to find people that are involved in the education community, involved in the schools, have an interest in that. So I think that it, you know, would be the same thing that we do. So maybe go that extra step to find additional people on there that would lead another, lend another voice to the board. May I just one follow-up to that? Oh, yeah. So, Council Member Horland, is there a suggestion of professional experience for a board as opposed to a requirement? Or how are you, I mean, because I understand we want them. It's that if we can't find them, we want to still be able to fill the role. Absolutely. And I think it's set forth in the code that there's desired professional professions that we would like to stay on the board. So I don't know how we would put that forth. I think, you know, perhaps when it comes time to appoint on the boards, and maybe it's even in the application. But the application has to be one-size-fits-all, I think, now, doesn't it, with the new? Okay. Maybe we could tweak that a little bit. And maybe, you know, we put it on there that it's suggested. You know, again, I don't want to limit who's applying, but I do think that we need to have a balance. I don't think we need – I think I understand what Council Member Ronson was saying. I think I agree with him. And I don't think we should put a restrictive on it. I think we should strongly suggest that you have a background or a level of understanding. I don't want to limit it. I don't want to limit it. But I think that we should encourage it. Well, I don't have a problem encouraging because that suggests we should be doing our homework and putting strong people in there that want to do this important role. But to say – I guess I'm confused, like, how many seats are we talking about? Like, we're going to say this seat has to have a general contract or this seat is going to have a – I wouldn't limit it in that fashion the way AHAC is structured. Okay. I think it's becoming more mindful and suggesting what professional experience we're going to do. And who's appointing these seats? Is it a rotating seat? I think it's in general applications, I think, in the applications that are put forward. I don't necessarily think that we need to – So you would prefer we go with a rotating seat that's appointed? Yeah, have that rotating seat. I think if we could enhance the – what the requirements – what we're looking for for that, I have no problem with that. But to put specific things on seats, I don't think we necessarily need more seats. No, I wouldn't put specific things on the seats. I think we need to enhance some of the requirements of this adjustment. Just to emphasize what's involved with the possibility. Correct, because I don't think that's been done. But not adding seats? No. Oh. We were talking about adding seats to AHAC. Who knows what – And we'll get there. Okay. Mayor Sortel? So I think we're heading in the same direction. My thing real quick is Michael probably has an idea. Let's ask Michael. Do you have an idea how to do this? Okay. You were there and you did it. Yeah. Yes. So planning and zoning board, the language in the code actually does not say required. It says recommended. So we – the hope that – and Danny was the one that rewrote that back in 2021 from what it used to say. The hope is that you would have some design professionals, planners, architects, and so forth on the board. But it doesn't say that you have to have all of them. But to be mindful of that when you're appointing, it would be great to have at least some of them have that professional expertise. Some of them may not. It doesn't fall under the individual appointer. Yeah. You know, it's really for us to take that into consideration. But regarding, you know, if we're going to have a description of what the board is, you know, applicants are expected to have, you know, are preferred to have these kind of backgrounds. And maybe that will weed out some people. Right. I think maybe it's how we're advertising it. Okay. And then with regard to AHAC, we have – there's 11 categories in the statute and also in our code, replicated in our code. Currently, I believe we're only satisfying four of them. And we're required to satisfy six. And that's on us. All of them are – the current eight, all of them except one, are residents. And you don't have to be a resident because – for that board specifically. But – so they all meet the resident – well, seven out of the eight meet the residency category. One of them is the elected official. But we're not meeting some of the other categories. For example, essential services. That's one that perhaps you may consider when you're filling the ninth appointment that's currently vacant. Well, maybe what we need to do is we need to be distributed a list of the members of the affordable housing and saying these we feel are in compliance. These are not – we don't feel these people are in compliance. Have another conversation with them to make sure we understood what they told us. And then maybe they are in – we're under compliance. I think maybe that's the starting point. You know, that's a difficult board to fill. It is, if you don't mind. Go ahead. I think that's definitely a board where we can get the imbalance as was put forth in the email we received today because it's so difficult to find people. And I know we talked about essential services and trying to market to police and fire and nurses and social workers. We – I don't know how we can do this because we typically put out the post and advertise within our own city. But for that board, they do not have to be a resident of our city. Correct. So I don't know if there's further outreach we can do. I know everybody's – every city is in the same boat. Yes. As you know, I used to work for the city of Miramar. We had that issue. We didn't have about three categories with any residents that applied. So – but we were allowed to, so we did actually reach out to others. And with this board, because – and this board, we can have an employee serve on that board because we have the mayor on there. There's the exception for this board. Yes, the essential services. So we could have – Could be a social worker, a teacher, but it could also be a police officer, a firefighter. Firefighter. So perhaps that's something that we could also put out internally to our first responders and see if anyone would have any interest in serving on the board. That might help us. Council Member Reinstein. You know, in terms of the outreach, I think we mentioned earlier on another topic that not everybody gets social media. When talking about waste management, not everybody sees what's put out on social media. And so maybe we can also be a little more creative as to how we share this information. You know, off the top of my head is maybe a discussion with, you know, the Plantation Walk, the Broward Mall, about putting, you know, some kind of signage there that has, you know, updates of information and has openings. There's got to be other ways that we can reach the public better than just – The hospital. You know, social media or even through the utility bill or those means. Okay. So having said all this, do you believe that we're meeting the requirements and the goals of each of the boards? And so just your thoughts on that. And are we maximizing our potential for these boards to be as capable and talented as they can be? I think along that point, and this is kind of suggesting maybe an expansion of it, of the membership of some of the boards. And what I was thinking is having a student, a high school student, be a non-voting member to the board. And I was specifically thinking of the Education Advisory Board, the Sustainability Board, Parks and Rec. that those might be three good boards. And I was – I did some very minimal research. I see that some cities have youth advisory boards. So maybe that's something not necessarily to initiate immediately, start with adding a student to at least those three boards, get them participating. Great – an interesting way to earn some service hours for some of these – for some of these students. I believe that would require a code change because I think Chapter 2 says that we – they have to be able to be a voter. So – but I think if you wanted to make exceptions, we can modify the code. Get the comment on – yeah. I like that idea. I think it's a way to start to get the youth in and then see if we want to move. I don't want to incur any more work for staff. But I think I'd love to see a youth advisory board in the city. But those three boards would be great if we could write that into the code to a non-voting student member. Okay. For EAB? I think Education Advisory Board, the Sustainability and Resiliency Board, and Parks and Recreation Board. Okay. Any others? I think that's probably good enough. That makes sense. But we're not going to kick them off if they're absent. Because – I can see the students not attending regularly. Well – So we just need to be flexible with our attendance. Actually, I kind of feel like we would kick them off if they don't show up. Because the whole point is I'm expecting a student who want to serve on this is going to be probably an honor type student that's going to take this serious. And we would communicate that, you know, this is a – But I think to Councilmember Andreu's point is they get things thrown at them through school and extracurricular that they're not really the masters of their own schedule like we can be on occasion. So – It's an AP exam. So I think we need to be a little more forgiving there. Approved absence. So maybe we come up with some different rules for the youth advisory board members. All right. And just to reiterate, staff liaisons obviously can help advise you on memberships for certain boards. Okay. Alternates. What is their role? Could they be perhaps serving on a rotating basis, not just when needed to meet a quorum? And I'll give you an example. Planning and Zoning Board actually does say in the code that you can rotate the alternates too to fill a seat. If both the – if both the regular member and rotating – no, sorry – regular and alternate member of the same Councilmember are absent, you could, on a rotating basis, put in one of the alternates to have seven members. Okay. So that's already a procedure for Planning and Zoning Board if you wanted to consider that type of thing. And is it set up so that one alternate doesn't always get – Yeah, it would be the rotating and then the next available rotating and then the next available rotating. So in the order of the pointers, numbers? Yes. May I clarify there? Yeah. Do you mean if both my people were absent? Yes. You would go where? Alphabetically to the next Councilmember? And their alternate – Rotating seat number. Seat number. Seat number. Okay, great. But I'm one anyway, so that would be correct. You go to number two then. There you go. Yeah. I'm group one. I'm not saying I'm number one, I'm group one. Right. So if your alternate was already serving, then we go to number two. Right. And ask their alternate. And if they can't, you'll just go to three. Yes. Exactly. Yeah. And since we had that occur in August, actually both of Councilmember Reinstein's appointments were not available for that meeting, so we went down the list and took that. Okay. So the next time that would happen, it would be the next member's alternate. Those were just absences, by the way. Yes, they were. As long as it doesn't happen three times in a row. Yes, they were. They told us the meeting before, so they were good. Okay. Well, that's good. Okay. And then – Oh, I'm sorry. Councilmember Horland. I just – I wanted to talk about the rotating basis because I thought we were going to have an expanded conversation on that. I did like Mr. Corman's suggestion about not just – so if my appointee is absent, I want to understand how that would work. How we would rotate the people in, then would it be my alternate in or we would just start going down the line and rotating people in for that. You know what I'm saying? So in the case of what happened in August? It wouldn't be in that case. Okay. It would just be my first person is not available. Right. Okay. So then are we just going – I know I understand the way the code's written now, but my understanding that Mr. Corman – am I correct in what you were stating? You want to be able to rotate people in more frequently, correctly? Correct? What I want is the option for if there is a missing seat or two on the dais, whether it is the rotating individual or your alternate – in other words, enabling your alternate and your primary to sit on the dais at the same time. Yeah. The question would be whether or not that gives you an unfair advantage. But – and especially if you have appointed your two plus the rotating, that would technically give you four spots on there. Right. Right. Right. But if the goal, especially with planning and zoning as a quasi-judicial body, is to allow residents who are coming up for difficulty waivers where that board decides it, I would much rather prefer we have a larger dais. And so the issue of – I'm using this word, it's not what I mean, but the corruption potential for having four representatives representing one individual there wouldn't actually apply if taken at whole with everything else that's going on with regards to qualifications and oversight of your appointments and everything else because it would take a real act to get four people not to show up, to have your four show up just for somebody to get a practical difficulty waiver. Right. It's more about, as a body, giving the greatest amount of fairness to the citizens. Right. So that's really what it was, is actually opening up the ability for alternates to sit on the dais. To sit on the dais. Okay. Gotcha. Thank you for that clarification. And it would obviously rotate if it was Member Anderson's first and then the next time it comes around, seat two, seat three. Okay. I gotcha. I mean, I think it's a good idea. Do you see any downside to that, Mr. Alpert? Because I think the goal here is to ensure that we have form. Yes. But also the goal is to have the alternates have a chance to learn when they do have to actually come up. Absolutely. Because sometimes they, when I was on the board, I rarely saw alternates because we usually had pretty good attendance. Okay. But the alternates, when they do come on, sometimes they look like, what am I supposed to do here? Because we haven't been to a meeting before. I lost one of my alternates for that reason. And he was a professional, but he never got called up very frequently. Right. So. Okay. Okay. So again, could these alternates help maximize the effectiveness of these boards? And which boards and committees would benefit from having alternates? So this is where my suggestion, AHAC, I think, was put in the code to say nine members. And I think that's probably because I don't think we can fit 11 members with the city attorney and city clerk on the dais. So perhaps if you want to have alternates to fill those extra spots when we need the quorum, and they could be encouraged to attend in the audience if there isn't. So keep the board the same size, but add alternates. Keep nine, but perhaps two alternates if you want to consider that. I think it's aspirational to fill those spots, but I don't see a downside in adding the two alternates. I agree. But that's also keeping in mind we can go outside of the city. Yes. We don't have to. So I think with that in mind, I think we could fill the alternate seats. Okay. I don't know. And that kind of rolls into the expansion topic. I kind of went ahead of myself here, but basically I said that previously. Is there any other boards or committees that you want to do that for? Okay. Most boards have seven members. And I think, I don't know about the attendance necessarily for all of them, but I think they're mostly running pretty well. Okay. That's all we got. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Item number 12 legislative items, PP 230037 public hearing, first reading of an ordinance of the city of Plantation, Florida, pertaining to the subject of zoning and land development, specifically pertaining to updating development procedures throughout the city code of ordinances. City Attorney Ezra, would you like to read the ordinance? He said he wants Quentin to read it. No, but. Assistant City Attorney. Before I begin, I just want to personally thank Mr. Albert for the incredibly long title that he drafted. This is a public hearing, first reading of an ordinance of the city of Plantation, Florida, pertaining to the subject of zoning and land development, specifically pertaining to updating development procedures throughout the city code of ordinances, including the elimination of references of the plans adjustment committee, board of adjustment, landscape review board, clarifying the process for temporary storage structures, removing smoke and heat detector provisions, clarifying certain processes for properties within the plantation acres improvement district, removing grandfathering provisions from vacation rental registrants, removing a reference to section 19-66, modifying requirements for development agreements and letters of credit related to construction, specifically amending chapter 1 general provisions section 1-15 entitled access to local public officials, amending chapter 2 section 2-32 entitled annual review of appointees or elected officials, uniform appointment process, amending chapter 5 section 5-16 entitled temporary storage structures, amending chapter 5.5 article 2 entitled telecommunications facilities, repealing chapter 8 article 2 entitled smoke and heat detectors, amending chapter 9 article 1 entitled floodplain management ordinance, amending chapter 10 article 2 entitled recovered materials dealer registration, amending chapter 14 article 4 division 7 entitled massage establishment and massage practice, amending chapter 14 article 5 division 1 section 14-219 entitled grandfathering vested rights, amending chapter 19 planning and development article 2 comprehensive plan section 19-67, entitled provisions regarding applying certain certain types of comprehensive plan flexibility, amending chapter 19 planning and development article 4 subdivision section 20-158 entitled construction agreements and financial assurances for promised improvements, amending chapter 25 traffic and vehicles, article 2 division 2 entitled stopping standing and parking, amending chapter 27 land development regulations, specifically article 2 entitled definitions and rules of construction, article 3 entitled decision making and administrative bodies, article 5 entitled development review procedures, article 6 entitled use regulations, article 8 entitled off-street parking, specifically section 27-128 electric vehicle charging stations and parking spaces, article 11 entitled development standards of general applicability, amending the physical and digital versions of the land development regulations, providing for codification severability, savings clause, conflicts and an effective date. Thank you. Mr. Alpert. I'm hoping my presentation will be shorter than that, so. We do too. Who wrote that? I figured. The city is in the process of updating the entire city code of ordinances, and this ordinance serves as a housekeeping procedure. So, a first step. City administration and planning staff desire to eliminate the plans adjustment committee, PAC, as one of the authorized boards and committees. With the adoption of this ordinance, the PAC will be sunsetting. In addition, the Board of Adjustment and Landscape Review Board are no longer functioning boards since the 2021 update of chapter 27 land development regulations. So, consequently, staff has reviewed several chapters, as you can see from the title, to delete references to PAC, BOA, and LRB, and to find other ways to streamline the code. Furthermore, we have cleaned up and clarified various other development review processes in the following chapters, 1, 2, 5, 5.5, 8, 9, 10, 14, 19, 20, 25, and 27. What is PAC? The Plans Adjustment Committee is tasked with approving certain application types so that they do not have to be heard by the Council or Planning and Zoning Board, including certain minor conditional uses, certain minor site plan amendments, certain minor use variances that have not been approved by the Director. And we are retaining that procedure if, you know, you get the notification of these administrative approvals, and if one or more Council members wants to see that be heard at the Council, you still have that option. So PAC is composed of the Mayor, the Building Official, and the Planning, Zoning, and Economic Development Director. All three must attend to have a quorum. This ordinance would provide for the Director to make a determination as to whether an application should be decided by staff, or the DRC, or the Planning and Zoning Board, or the City Council. Just an example of a change that's in your backup. So by removing PAC, as you can see in the table, the threshold from 2,500 to now 6,000 would be considered administrative, again, subject to the call-up procedure. Staff recommends approval. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval on December 5th. Obviously, there's a lot there. If you have any questions, I'm happy to address them. I don't see anybody who wants to speak. Motion to approve? Second. Wait. Sorry, I was trying to... Councilmember Reinstein. The motion is for the entirety of 12. I do have some... Yes. I do have a couple questions. Okay. It seems that some of the sections had provisions where the City Council was essentially the ultimate Board of Appeal, and some don't. Can you generally respond to why the decision is for some of these? They don't allow appeal to the Council, and some don't. And I can tell you, you know, for example, the stormwater management regulations, right, there's... It was one, page 724 of the 1,566. And... What section number is that? That's section 9-21. Okay. And I apologize if we didn't discuss this before the meeting, but in terms of that, why there's not an opportunity for residents to ultimately appeal to the City Council. 9-21. It used to be 9-27. This is just talking about interpretation. Article 2, it's Exhibit F. Oh, okay. So the change was... This is not a change. This... I'm asking simply in terms of why the City Council is not added in, or why were they left off to begin with as the ultimate appeal. In B. It had Board of Adjustment, and we struck through that, and put it Planning and Zoning Board. But if you... If the Council would like to have that purview, that's... You know, it just seemed to me that it was just inconsistent, and I hadn't noticed it before until reviewing what the changes are requested. And, you know, it seems that for many others, we view the City Council as that ultimate appellate body. And I think it's consistent to have it in every opportunity that it's afforded an appeal process. It's just that we had made that change because Board of Adjustment was dissolved, and its function became part of Planning and Zoning Board. But if you wish to make a Council, that's... I don't know if anybody else has an opinion on it, but it seems to me that in any location where there should have been an opportunity for that ultimate appeal, we're the ones that are elected and appropriate, but anybody have any thoughts on that? Is that what you want to speak to or something else? Councilmember Andrea? Councilmember Andrea? I would agree with having that appeal process come to the Council. I actually had a different question on page 31. We want to get consensus on it. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I'm fine with that. Go ahead. Just in that single instance, is that what you're talking about? You know, that was one that's... May I present? Yeah. That was one that stood out to me. There's... I do have one other question on another section called appeals. I would ask that if it's the consensus that that's an important step, that if they find other instances where it was left off as well, that I'm not bringing up at the moment, or nobody else has found, that we just keep that consistent, that we're always the ultimate body for appellate purposes. I'm okay with that. I am as well. And we will scour it before second reading just to make sure that we find other references. Councilmember Andrea? I just want to make sure that I was understanding or comprehending some of the verbiage on page 31. I believe it's under... I don't know what... It's hard to... Oh, Administrative Relief, Part 3. Of what section? Section... It's under D. What section? What chapter and section? Is it still Chapter 9? Oh. Section 5.563, Administrative Relief. Thank you. I'm sorry. Okay. So it's about if the council wanted to use the call-up privilege. Yeah. Which I don't think we've done that. But in the event that it were to happen, there's a line about not requiring a public hearing and getting input from the public. It says we're not required to do that. But aren't we always... If we are going to call it up, wouldn't we be required to get... I know we would want it, but I thought it would be a requirement that we have to take public comment. Yeah. I don't believe I changed that with this revision, but I believe Quentin... Or am I not understanding that? Section 5.563. I am, for the record, Quentin Morgan, Assistant City Attorney. Just to go back to Council Member Reinstein's point, the council at that time, back in 2014, didn't want to take on that responsibility. So that's why the ordinance was written that way back then. If this council chooses to do something different, obviously, you can take on that responsibility. It's within your right. Obviously, that was why it was written that way, and he didn't change that. Right. He just was removing that provision that is no longer... Right. It's my attention. Yeah. Same thing. And as far as the call-up procedure, typically, that wouldn't require the public comment because it would be your privilege as a member of the council. So you could obviously, like you said, you can inquire as to what the public comment may be, but the ultimate decision for that call-up would be yours. And if you did call it up, the procedure probably, and I can't find the page, but calls for a different discussion after the call-up has been performed. So it's the call-up, and then the review, and then there may be public discussion at that point, but not public discussion whether or not you choose to call it up, if that makes sense. Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Reinstein. Councilmember Reinstein. Thank you. One more, and again, I only caught this late, and I didn't bring it up to you. This is page 753 of 1,566. It's section 19-89 appeals. Okay. And I think maybe this is in regards to the strikeout language. Yes. If you look at the last sentence of the first paragraph that begins with, in the event, if you read that to yourself with the strikeout language. Oh, of the first paragraph. Yes. I think you're just, I think you struck out to, of the, if that's what you meant, in the event, then an independent order of the council. Council is absent. If that's what you intended. Yes. Okay. Sorry, I didn't bring that in advance. Any other comments from the dais? Can we have a motion? I made a motion to approve. I can amend it. Do you want me to amend my motion, Mr. Ezra? Ezra? Well, again, you could use the same procedure. Okay. If the maker of the motion wants to announce the amendment on the record and as long as the person who made the second does not object and nobody else objects, that would be acceptable. I don't think I'd second. We did. Did you second? I think I did. Okay. You want to amend, you want to amend your second? Okay. Well, she wants real control. Yeah, I don't. I'll amend my motion to be reflective of the comments of council and direction to staff for those changes made. I have a public comment for Mr. Wynn. We beat you down and you don't want to come up anymore. Mission accomplished. Any other comments from the chamber? Hearing none, Ms. Bedgrove, please call the roll. I just want to point out one thing with regard to appellate procedure and planning and zoning board, it has been an existing for resident waivers and variances. It ends with P and Z, but they would appeal a denial to the city council. Oh, sorry, sorry. No. Okay. Right now it would go to the courts, circuit court, because they have the jurisdiction. You've given them that jurisdiction over the residential variances. And that's primarily their only function as a sovereign as far as what they have under their authority to make the final determination of the city. So you're not trying to... Exclude that jurisdiction. Okay. Just wanted to just clarify that for the record. I misspoke. Thank you. So is our motion still good? I think so. Ms. Bedgrove, please call the roll. Council Member Horland. Yes. Council Member Reinstein. Yes. Council Member Anderson. Yes. Okay. Okay. Item 13, PD 23-0006, public hearing first reading of an ordinance of the city council of the city plantation floor pertaining to the subject of comprehensive planning and amending the text of the future land use element to establish a unified flex zone and amend related flex and reserve policies. City Attorney Ezra, please read the ordinance. Yes, sir. This is public hearing first reading of an ordinance of the city council of the city of plantation floor pertaining to the subject of comprehensive planning, amending the text of the future land use element to establish a unified flex zone and amend related flex and reserve policies, amending the text of the future land use element to incorporate policies from the Broward County land use plan relating to affordable housing, amending the neighborhood design element to update figure 1.6, amending the future land use map to reflect the unified flex zone, amending the physical and digital versions of the city of plantation comprehensive plan, providing for transmittal to the state and land planning agency, providing for transmittal of adopted amendments to the Broward County planning council for recertification, providing for conflict severability and effective date. That's it? Mr. Alpert? We would like to present this item and item 14 together since they're related topics. May I read the title of that? And I understand they're two separate public hearings. The second ordinance, PP23-0057, is public hearing first reading of an ordinance of the city of plantation floor pertaining to the subject of zoning and land development, amending chapter 19 of the city code of ordinances, specifically amending section 19-67 entitled provisions regarding applying certain types of comprehensive plan flexibility, amending article 3 entitled local activity centers including section 19-70 entitled plantation gateway local activity center and section 19-71 entitled assignment of residential LAC units and amending chapter 27 of the city code of ordinances, specifically amending table 22-1 in section 27-22 entitled planning and zoning board, amending table 23-1 in section 27-23 entitled city council and amending table 41-1 in section 27-41 entitled general procedures, amending the physical and digital versions of the land development regulations, providing for codification, severability, a savings clause, conflicts, and an effective date. And just so the record is clear, I understand the presentation. There will be one presentation and you will vote on each of the items separately. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Mr. Albert. It's been a long journey. I would like recognition that two out of my three ordinance titles were not over a page. Application PB23-006 is a comprehensive plan text amendment to create a unified flexibility zone and to clarify comprehensive plan procedures related to the assignment of flexibility units. An application PB23-0057 is a companion application for land development code text amendments to modify text and tables to clarify land development regulations related to the assignment of flex units and comprehensive plan procedures. Comprehensive plan text amendment also adopts the county's policies 2.16.3 and 2.16.4 of the Broward County land use plan which relate to the affordable housing, bonus density and sets our maximum density to 25 units per acre in priority areas for redevelopment. These policies are related to affordable housing incentives and benefit the city's eligibility for county grants. The LDC text amendment modifies the text in chapter 19 and a few tables in chapter 27 to clarify procedures and to be consistent with the comp plan text amendments. So specifically, the policies of the county use plan that we're talking about are, and you've heard this before with Commissioner Geller, six bonus units for every moderate income unit, nine for every low income unit, and 19 bonus units for every very low income unit. What does flex mean? Flex or flexibility units represent the difference between the number of dwelling units permitted within a flexibility zone under the Broward County comp plan and the number of units permitted under the city's comp plan. These units result from the city's plan generally being more restrictive, hence the request for flexibility to add units to an applicant's property. What are redevelopment units? These are units that are additional permitted dwelling units equal to 3% of the total number as established by the 2017 Broward Next Land Use Plan. Redevelopment units replace what formerly was known as reserve units, which no longer exist. And what does the flexibility zone mean? This is the geographic area delineated on the boundary maps and in the administrative flexibility rules documents within Broward County Planning Council, for which residential densities and land uses may be redistributed through the plan certification process. In other words, you won't need to file for a land use plan amendment. That's another way to do this. So the city is proposing to create a unified flex zone which will exclude all residential areas outside of mixed use areas and priority redevelopment areas. So this is the current map that we have of our flexibility zones. And just for reference, flex zone 73 is the area east of the Turnpike, 76 east of the University, 75X east of Hiatus, and 68 is west of Hiatus. So the city is proposing one entire jurisdiction. However, only the areas that are colored in red or blue would be considered for potential flexibility allocation. So it excludes all the single family and multifamily residential communities in the city, which is the areas that are grayed out. So, of course, you recognize the midtown area between State Road 84, Cleary Boulevard, University in Pine Island, the gateway area along State Road 7. And we had talked about this in our workshop back in October about looking at priority areas along Sunrise Boulevard that are already commercial or industrial land use. And that's what the red represents. The blue color represents community facilities. So perhaps areas that are civic buildings, institutional buildings, places of worship, and so forth potentially could add a residential to them as well. So we wanted to share the map with you and to see if you had any comments or questions about this. And, of course, this is the gateway area, which is our local activity center designation on our comprehensive plan. In the code amendment, the companion ordinance for the code, we enhance the policy considerations and review criteria for the council, for staff, and planning and zoning board that, when you're considering an applicant's request for flex unit allocation, either in the local activity center of the gateway or the midtown or the priority redevelopment areas, there are some existing criteria such as does the project contribute to the tax base, add employment, provide other positive economic impacts, does it impact public services and generate negative secondary effects, is it compatible to the surrounding area? But we added a few additional criteria that the council could consider when you're weighing these requests. Does it utilize sustainable building practices? Does it integrate affordable housing component with a mix of income levels? Does it incorporate a diversity of housing types and sizes? And does it integrate mixed-use design with vertical being a preference? Staff recommends approval. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval on December 5th. And I will note at the Planning and Zoning Board, some residents from Plantation Acres were there, and they were happy to see how we came up with the map of the unified flex zone. Don't believe it. I want to see a video. I have no problem. Council Member Horland. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Alpert, to you and Mr. Holmes for working on this. I think this is where we need it to be. We've had the discussion about priority redevelopment areas. Can you just give us a little insight into how those were determined? So, easily identifiable on the map, Knob Hill and Cleary. So, we're looking at Plantation Promenade, where the Publix is, and across the street, the sky is square. Yes. Why would those, just I think for edification of everyone, be considered priority redevelopment areas? Because they're along a major roadway that has transit capability. Okay. No one, they may remain shopping centers like that for decades into the future, but you never know. So, that's basically how we're identifying the potential. Commercial areas. Yes. And that's in response to Live Local, but it's also in response to what we've seen. For example, the shopping center that's in Sunrise along 44th Street, it used to have a Winn-Dixie. The Winn-Dixie went away, and then now there's a residential component in addition to the commercial component. So, just to have that potential. Also, along Broward Boulevard, for example, where the Publix and the former Winn-Dixie, now the food fair, those sites are as well. Right. Because we've actually heard of interest of somebody creating a mixed-use project there as well. And as you mentioned, that's what's being encouraged with Live Local, is taking up some of that parking. Yes. Especially in a shopping center such as that, including some mixed-use in there. Yeah. Yes. Thank you for that. Sure. Mr. Alpert, I'm looking at the bottom corner there, and I think I'm looking at Tropical. I'm looking at Seminole. I'm looking at South Plantation. Yes. I think we should consider excluding these areas that are surrounded by single-family homes. I don't think anybody would be happy if a density project with FLEX was being utilized for the elementary school on 54th or at Tropical. You know, because they're going to have a conversation, I believe in May, about closing schools. Right. So I don't think we're on the list. Hopefully not. But it could be in the future. Yes. So I don't know what my colleagues feel about that. But I sort of feel like if it's like a school surrounded by single-family homes, we shouldn't be allowing FLEX to be utilized there. It should be along those transportation corridors that you were talking about. I agree. I will note, though, you'll see there are some schools, maybe not necessarily in Broward County, and places of worship, that have some extra land. And so perhaps something you can consider, if this is a possibility, maybe a height restriction on those types of sites where they are surrounded by single-family. Well, I think my comment when we were talking about this in that workshop that we had is that I don't want to destroy the integrity of our – you know, we're all focused on plantation acres. Right. And the reality is we want to protect the integrity of all our single-family homes. So if there is a repurposing of that school land sometime in the future when we're long gone, I don't think we want multi-story, high-density development in there. I think that we want to keep the – the word escapes me, but the integrity and the character of those communities. So I can't tell you – like Central Park Elementary, and then I don't know if there should – well, I guess that it could be in line with the apartments behind the – so, okay. I think you understand where my ask is. Yes, and we heard you loud and clear at the workshop not to, you know, protect those single-family neighborhoods, and we're not suggesting – Because I think some of those blue areas need to be – Right, but we're not suggesting high-rises here. No, I know. We're suggesting potential units one or two or three-story. But I think that if you're going to put, like, townhouses in there, that's not necessarily in line with the current character of those neighborhoods. Yes, and our line of thinking, teacher housing, the shortage for housing for teachers. And that's a possibility. Right. Yeah. So – Right. So that's why we're showing that. You might need to keep that option open. I mean, I'm okay leaving it as to be determined. I think those areas do need to be identified only because of the right-sizing of the schools, and that might be a conversation that's had. You know, and perhaps it's not going to be, you know, a mid-rise, but it might be townhomes. Right. Councilmember Andreu. Thank you. Mr. Alpert, can you remind me how many flex units we'll have in this pool? It's less than 2,000. Okay. I just wanted, again, on record, I've been very clear, and my stance hasn't changed. In essence, I know it wouldn't happen, but I'm just going to, like, you know, hypothetical, and, of course, I'm going to go way out there. If this is approved, that lot that is on Knob Hill and Broward Boulevard, or actually, is that – The corner of Hawks Landing. Correct. The corner – that backs Hawks Landing. Right. You could put 100 houses there. The lot that the school board owns? Correct. It's showing white. Oh, okay. And also, there was a land use – What's next to that, then? There was a land use amendment that approved a certain density, which basically is, I believe, 43 homes. I think that's what – Thirty-nine. Thirty-nine at that time, right? Okay. We reduced it more. I remember that. But – okay. I'm sorry. Then what is that shaded area? Shaded area in blue, it's very hard to see. It's actually city-owned property. It has a residential land use. It's a parking lot. Are you looking at the red, or are you looking – I was looking at the priority, the red, right? Oops. I'm sorry. That's what I thought you were asking, where the car wash is and CVS is and – Oh, that's the – Oh, okay. That's Broward and Knobby. It was. But where is the – Correct. There we go. Yeah. Are you talking about – Okay. So if that were to be replaced, is what you're saying? Right. Okay. I mean, currently that's offices and retail. I won't belabor it. I don't support the unified flex. I've been clear about it from day one. I don't think that it allows equity to the entire city. Okay. Council Member Anderson? Could you tell me the light blue, the TBD, what would be the process – just – thanks for talking to me the other day, both you and Danny. Sure. Any of the light blue areas, what would be the process if someone wanted to build there? It would come to you. Right. With a site plan and a request for flex units and any other things that they – And we can say no? Yes. Okay. But what about the recent Governor's thing that can jam – Live Local Act that can jam a lot more in? Right. Do we – don't we lose some? The current threshold is 40 percent affordable housing. And if that zoning has to be in place and the land use has to be in place. And so no rezoning type of thing. And if they don't ask for waivers, I believe, then it ultimately would have to be approved. No public hearing. No public hearing. Right. Right. Right. But otherwise, they'd have to come to us and everything so we could – Yes. If it doesn't fit the character. Like if it was a school being repurposed and they wanted to put maybe townhomes a little bit denser than single family homes. Right. But it was for teachers, we could massage all that. Right. The electeds, whoever sitting up there in the future could decide at that time. Right. And remember, I mentioned the criteria. One of the criteria – existing criteria with the change is compatibility. So if you feel somebody wanted to do a high-rise apartment building around Tropica Elementary, would that be compatible? That's the criteria staff planning and zoning and council would have. No, we don't think that's appropriate here. Maybe you do something that's two-story. Right. Okay. Thank you. Yep. City Attorney Ezra. Thank you. I'm actually going in the direction of Councilmember Anderson's question. I just want to state on the record, the allocation of flex units is a legislative function. So it is discretionary with you on whether or not you want to approve the allocation of flex. That is number one. Number two, it is possible that zoning may also limit the available density on a piece of property. So you can't – they have to be consistent with one another. So it's possible that a property may need to be rezoned and also have flex allocated. And under both of those circumstances, you're going to be looking at neighborhood compatibility. There's a little bit less discretion with the rezoning than there is with flex, but you still have discretion. Thank you. You're welcome. Councilmember Reinstein. Councilmember Reinstein. So my question really is towards Councilmember Andreu. I know you've mentioned before your position on unified flex, but in terms of – I heard you again tonight mention equity. Can you maybe comment on that a little bit more as how unified flex is inequitable? Again, in my humble opinion. I feel that you can burden one area of the city or overburden one area of the city. So if you wanted to use all 2,000 units in Gateway, this is allowing you to do that. Whereas right now, Gateway has a set number. I don't know what that is. 200 and – zero. Zero. So Gateway has zero right now. And you could in essence now have 2,000 units in the Gateway area. That is exactly what I mean. Whereas the way we have it now currently – exactly. I didn't hear the comment. I didn't hear that either. They still have to go through a few more steps, right? And they're not taking – we talked about this at length again. I don't want to belabor it. But they can't take the express train and bypass, right, getting the land use amendment. Right. And which also gives the opportunity to the residents to have time to know these items are coming and also let their opinions be known, share their comments with us. So I can go on and on, but that's just a little bit of why I feel like it's not an equitable plan. And I just can't support it. May I follow up with a question? Mr. Albert, in terms of the number of flex that become available, the determination as to how many flex units are allotted, who's making that determination? Council is still making that, correct? Yes. So the question as to whether, whatever the number – Council Member Jairo mentioned 2,000 – that would still come to the council to make that determination. Yes. It's not something that would just automatically upon request or something. Right. Right. Okay. Thank you. Council Member Horland. Thank you, Mr. President. We joke around about it because I know you've been very vocal about it. And it's not to dismiss your concerns, because I think – I understand your concerns. I've been a proponent of the flex because I – as I've stated, I do think that it gives this council or future councils a little more flexibility in determining when we see the growth of the city where we can, you know, place those units. I think that one of the things we've talked about in strategic planning session is the importance of putting those units, and especially when we're talking about affordable housing, on our transportation corridors. So I appreciate that this map came back and you took all of our considerations, most of them into concern – I mean, concerns into consideration in protecting our single-family neighborhoods from the utilization of flex. But I still think that there is some applicability along the gateway when we're talking about how we're transforming that area and the transportation corridor that exists there. So while I understand the concerns, I think – I'm not going to say I can't imagine a council doing that, but putting 2,000 units in there, I don't think would be – it wouldn't be equitable, certainly, but I don't think it would be in the best interest of the city. And, again, I like that flexibility that we can kind of look at that and place it where we see the need as the city continues to grow. And I don't think the gateway is the area that should be entirely focused on, but I like having that option available. So I understand Councilmember Andrea's concerns, but I think there are enough guardrails in place where we can apply that properly. Thank you, Mr. President. I don't see any other comments. Can we have a motion? Well, you don't have a button on here. Well, I just wanted to point out through the land use process, the same thing can happen. The same fear that you have, it can happen through the land use. It'll just take nine months instead of two months for it to happen. And I thought that we were trying to create these rules to only utilize the flex when it's incentivizing something that we feel it's need. Affordable housing, et cetera. Correct. Correct. That's correct. And as the city attorney said, this council still has the authority. No one has any rights to those units, or you don't have to. Someone comes in with an application, it's legislative in nature, you can say no. You can say no through a land use plan amendment, or you can say no through flex, or vice versa. And I want to make a... Regarding gateway, there's big parts of the gateway that's gobbled up already. So they can't, can't be, you know, there's areas that just can't be utilized, you know. Yeah, it would be, I mean, although gateway is a redevelopment area, and you would typically find cities allocated. But there's some new developments in there. There are. That it won't be utilized there. So, like the north end is a very large project there. It doesn't seem like it's ever going to get done, but nonetheless, it can't be utilized there. Right. It is what it is. It's been approved by a prior council. So... Yeah, it's challenging along the gateway court. I don't see any other comments. Can I have a motion? Motion to approve. Okay. Second. Okay. Public comment, Mr. Wynn, unless we beat you down again. And the public comment will be for 13 and 14. And my motion is for 13. Right. We're only voting on 13, but comments will be for both. Happy New Year. Happy New Year. Go in, 944 Northwest 92nd Terrace. I hope City Attorney Ezreal is getting overtime for his extra wordage. He gets paid by the hour. All right. So, without going into too much detail on any of this, I know we've all discussed this general concept at length. And it falls a lot in line with better development strategies, with empowering you guys to be able to approve projects that developers can bring in that are better for growing a city responsibly, rather than just putting more and more people in a place, which brings more and more cards and brings more and more lots and all the things that everybody goes and laments and goes, you know, you know, back when I was a kid here, we didn't have any of that. And now it's just, oh, horns and traffic and noise. We want to make sure that any future development that we do doesn't add to that. It may add people. It may have prosperity. Hopefully it does. Add more small businesses, more reasons for people to come here, but not more of that. In fact, if we do it right, we might even be able to reduce some of that. Essentially cities aren't loud, cars are loud. So on the whole big picture of this, the boards that have been working, the committees that have been working on this have been working for a while. I happen to know a number of them. The people on them and I trust in what they're doing is for the best interest of our city. I think in the sense on the school side of things, we need to keep in mind that these are not, these are essentially flexibility for housing development. These are not forcing anything. Now these still put the onus on you guys to say, no, we're not doing that. But we don't know what the future is going to be. And we know this stuff takes a really long time to get instituted, to get changed. And if we can set things in place now for people 10 years, 20 years from now to have a framework to work with, this opens doors, but it doesn't force anyone to walk through. We want to provide those opportunities so we can better address those challenges that we don't even know about without changing anything today, right? This doesn't force anything. Interestingly enough in the acres, I was just talking about the idea that because they have septic fields, you couldn't even really densify that area very much, even if you like demanded it. So that on its own, getting it out of the way, getting some of those areas that people are really going to be in strong belief of their community values is totally fine. For the areas that have development opportunities, those are the places, like you said, to have that transportation future, those corridors. The thing is we need to keep in mind that eventually areas that are not transportation corridors could also become them with more smaller mobility efforts and things like that. We just need to be thinking towards the future. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wynn. Mr. Coughlin. Dennis Coughlin, 4581 Northwest Sixth Court. The backup of this for the public was 58 pages. There wasn't a single map in here. I happen to remember what the Flex Zones used to be. Flex Zone 75 swallowed up Flex Zone 74, and that's west of the Turnpike. At that time, they wanted to put in housing into the technology park and into the commercial properties. Aston got statements that they would never come east of the Turnpike. Ta-da. There wasn't any more flexibility. I moved in here. There was no flexibility in Flex Zone 73, neighborhood east of the Turnpike. They've jammed over 800 units in there since with LAC, right? We're going to be talking about LAC, right? Now, when they did stuff like this and broke their word and moved east of the Turnpike, in Plantation Park east, they doubled the size of the blasted bridge across the C-12 canal. Doubled the size. You're taking down my maps. I want the time stopped. Put the map back up, please. We lost. It's coming. Give it a minute. It's coming. All right. Mr. LeMay left the room. They did come up on the backup. This is what's posted on the agenda. That's what I just pulled up on my computer. That's what I just did. There were 58 pages in the backup. None of the maps were there. Okay? If you look at Flex Zone 73, you have 46th Avenue. It runs from basically Sunrise to Broward. And we used to have Plantation Business Park there, and that was supposed to be for commercial, which was supposed to create jobs so that people could afford Plantation's single-family homes. Single-family homes. They flipped it to residential. It's already been commented on. All right. Well, the unified Flex Zone plan scrambled the sunny side up of Plantation's residential neighborhoods, or you could say it ripped up the fabric of the Plantation's residential neighborhoods. It drained the commercial acreage that we had, so limited numbers of acres, and put in high-density, high-rise residential. And again, this is what I'm talking about. Public could not see what's going on, but 46th Avenue, you can see it has blue on it as well. The Apostolic Church at the north, where they converted the Plantation Business Park to residential, has acres there, right next to the former Plantation Business Park. At the south end, at Broward, you've got the Baptist Church. Baptist Church, 46th Avenue. I don't have a pointer there, but you can see the blue on 46th Avenue. Okay? And they've got acres there on the Baptist Church. Okay? They've already jammed over 800 units in along the gateway, and they doubled the capacity for the dadgum bridge into Plantation Park East. I don't want to have to tell you what that does to the neighborhood, because when they took that bridge down to revet the revetment for the canal plantation, Park East actually became a single-family neighborhood. No interruptions, no cut-throughs. Take down the bridge, do what you want, but you're impinging mightily on the gateway, which was supposed to be commercial, to build jobs so people could afford single-family homes, which was what plantation used to be, and it's no longer. I leave back my time, and thank you for letting me extend. Of course. Thank you, Dennis. Mr. Alpert, first, thank you for forwarding us those presentations, but are we on a path to have them included in the agendas? Is February a reasonable time that we're going to have the PDF presentations part of the agenda packages put out to the public on Thursday or Friday at the latest? Yeah. Okay. No, I understand, and I'm a deadline. My job's deadline, so 11-59-59, I'm on time, but 12-00-00, I'm late, and I get to pay my clients penalty. So, I think these presentations are extremely valuable because it does focus us on important things, things that you feel that we should be looking at, and then we can go into the detail of it, and then you can see the frustration of the residents. I think they do serve a very valuable tool for the residents, so they can look it over, similar just looking over the agenda, and then you can similar look over this executive summary. So, I know it's going to recreate new timelines, so February, we can start expecting to see the PDF presentations as part of the full agenda packages, so we don't have, so everyone feels that they get to see everything in advance. Just to point out, these two maps were in the agenda item 13. Okay. Were they, okay. That was an incorrect statement. No problem. These two maps were in your agenda item. I just want to point out something. With the presentations, they, you know, we typically complete our staff reports first, and then we work on the presentations. I can tell you that over time, the presentations, like I will go home and I'll be sitting there and I'll think, hey, we need, maybe we should do this map. And Sean will tell you, I come in in the morning and I'm like, hey, I need you to change this map and put this on there and change this around. And, you know, so there could be some minor changes to a presentation by the time we get here because, you know, but for the most part. We substantially have the presentation you're going to give, and then if you have tweaks, because I get it, you know, there's an evolving thing. Yes. You get it done. It's never done until you actually present it, right? Yes. If we were doing this tomorrow, I bet you it would probably change a little bit again, right? Right, right. Okay. Council Member Horland. I just have a question. Do we have the bandwidth to upload all those presentations online? Because I think that's an enormous issue. I think we're going to have to do it in PDF to reduce the size of it. Because I think we need to look at what that's going on. And I understand your point. I would assume it was PDF. Right. I understand your point, but I'm looking at also what that's going to take for staff time. And do we have the bandwidth to get that up there? Yeah. If we do it in PDF, we're going to have to convert it from the PowerPoint to PDF. I just think it's in the best interest of the residents. That's why I'm bringing it up. Yeah. No, we totally understand it. We try to condense it. I mean, you know, the staff report basically provides all the information as well. We just try to take, you know, for presentation purposes. Let's create an executive summary. Yes. Yeah. It's a cliff notes. Right. I didn't realize that when I was reading it. That makes sense now. Right. So. Mr. Corman. I might need the extra two minutes in this one. Rob Corman, one one zero nine five White Hawk Street. I'm actually commenting now in my role as chair of planning and zoning to give you a little bit of information as to context related to council member Andrea's concerns in particular, because this was presented to planning and zoning. We read through every word. We had several comments and questions for staff in particular with regards to how in the future, potentially this issue could be abused to the detriment of citizens who are living by the areas that are colored in pink. We actually didn't see the blue during that time. That was added later. But as I looked at it for this particular package, it wouldn't have actually raised many flags because it's to be determined. It's not actually getting codified at this point. So if we stick to just the issues of the pink, there were a couple of elements of concern. One that staff eliminated had to do with a bizarre set of wording that said if something is next to a redevelopment area bounded by two sides, flex could be used in there. So if you look at the gateway where it's tucked in on two sides, basically two sides of a square, you would have been allowed to push in there. And what we wanted was some hard protections on there. The other element which Mr. Alpert mentioned is that all of these things are subject to the approval of council and the oversight of council planning and zoning and other elements. So the idea that was being asked and the question that was being asked was one of whether or not the flex zone should go from four down to a single unified one and protect, in essence, the single family homes and the character of those single family developments with implantation. And that's what we were trying to think of. So to your point of equity, one of the greatest elements of equity, as was quoted to me by a very intelligent person, was notion of bandwidth. Bandwidth, in particular, personal bandwidth and the capability that individuals have to participate in their local government. The folks who are sitting on the dais, those of us who are on the board, have dedicated ourselves to having a little bit more bandwidth to understand the minutia of the code, all 640,000 words of it that exist for the city of plantation. Not everybody can do that. So at least in the role of planning and zoning, everybody who was sitting on the dais when we heard this had the same idea, which is one of protecting the residents of plantation by putting guardrails in place. One of those biggest guardrails, which hasn't been mentioned, but actually twice by this previous council, was overridden, was the notice of the, with the idea of the notification boundaries. If you look at page 802, I believe, out of the 1566 that are in there, what you'll see is a notification boundary table and some changes that were requested to that, in particular with regards to the idea of utilizing flex. If this is decided to go in place with those pink zones and the notification boundaries are expanded to the 1,000 feet that we requested, what that means is everybody within 1,000 feet is going to get notified of this potential change, which allows them to now dedicate the limited bandwidth that exists in their personal lives to this element that might be more germane to them. You put a 1,000-foot circle around any one of those blue areas and you're going to touch many more residences than you will with the 300-foot circle that currently exists. The reason why this becomes so significant, we saw actually at the same meeting that we heard this, which had to do with the gas station that's going to come before you all eventually, but when the 300-foot radius was put in place, it touched two homes. When the change to the Motorola property that you actually did hear about, it touched seven homes, I believe. When you talk about a notification boundary, especially when you put 150 to 200 feet worth of parking lot in between it or 180 feet of University Drive. So when you're trying to think of whether or not we can actually protect these areas which might have potential for abuse, the oversight exists within the council and within the code. The oversight exists within the ability to deny somebody the opportunity to use FLEX, but again, FLEX in and of itself is not the boogeyman because there's underlying zoning that dictates the amount of density you can put in there. FLEX is a question of whether or not you want to allow them to go over that density if they put in certain things like affordable housing. And if we truly do decide that that is necessary, for example, on a school board property, actually the one on hiatus right there that you were referring to, which is currently zone 3.3, if they were to come to us and say, hey, we want to put 50 homes in exclusively for teachers in Broward County, that's going to be a different conversation than the one that happened when Lennar said we want to put 120 units in just because we want to do it. So you will always have that discretion with the notification boundaries that are in there. I highly encourage you to keep them in place or even go larger because the developers are not going to incur a huge cost by notifying those other families. But what it will do is allow individual residents within the city of plantation to decide for themselves whether or not they are willing to take on that burden. Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Corman. Okay. I do not see any other comments. Is there a last call from the chamber? Anybody else want to make a comment on the item? We have a motion and a second. Ms. Begaro, can you call the roll? Council member Horland? Yes. Council member Einstein? Yes. Council member Anderson? Yes. Council member Andreu? No. Council member Fagin? Yes. Thank you. All right. 14, we combined with that, so we need a motion. Motion to approve. Second. Ms. Begaro, can you call the roll? Council member Horland? Yes. Council member Einstein? Yes. Council member Anderson? Yes. Council member Andreu? No. Council member Fagin? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Quasi-judicial. City Attorney Ezra, please read the procedures for a quasi-judicial hearing. Yes, sir. The city clerk will swear on all witnesses before speaking. Please state your name and whether you have been administered an oath. Any speaker may be cross-examined. If you refuse to be cross-examined, your testimony may not be considered. Cross-examination shall be conducted in a courteous manner. The material in the city clerk's agenda packet will be made a part of the record. City staff will make the first presentation followed by presentations from the applicant. Any affected parties in the public. The elected officials may set reasonable time limits for speakers. The hearing will then be closed and the matter decided. The city council's decision will be delineated in its motion and rendered in writing by way of a development order, resolution, or ordinance evidencing its decision. The city council may also decide to continue the matter to a designated time to allow for additional research or review. Thank you. If you're planning on speaking on any matters in quasi-judicial, if you could stand to be sworn in. Ms. Begaro, can you swear everyone in? Okay. Everybody standing with the right hand up. Okay. Do you swear or affirm that the evidence that you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Item 15 PM 230034 consideration of a request to approve a minor site plan revision for Xfinity. The property is located at 1501 South University Drive in Zone M-PM Mixed Use Plantation Midtown. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is application PM 23-0034. It is a minor site plan revision to install security shutters behind the main entry doors and storefront glass for an Xfinity store. The property is located at 1501 South University Drive. You can see that's located at the very southern end of University Drive near the boundary, the southern boundary of the city. The agent for this request is Paola Granados. The size of the property is approximately 8.7 acres. The underlying zoning district is the city's MPM district, which is the Midtown Mixed Use District. And the existing use is for a commercial shopping center. This is just an aerial photo kind of showing you the surrounding areas in the property located here. And the bay is located approximately there for Xfinity. The floor plan of Xfinity is shown here. And basically what they're proposing to do, there's two entryways through the doors here. And there are windows that are located. Xfinity is proposing to place the security shutters in the windows and at the doors of their bay. This is a photo of the shutter that they're proposing, a security shutter. And you can kind of see the little punch pattern that they're proposing. Staff has looked at some other alternatives that are kind of used out there in the market for security shutters. This is a transparent roll security gate. And we've had several discussions with Xfinity. And this is the type of security gate that we were recommending that Xfinity consider for securing the premises. This is just a picture of what the perforated shutters kind of look like when they're installed on a storefront. And for us, this is another picture of the perforated shutters as well. So one of the things before I get into this slide is one of our concerns, many people say, well, what's the big deal with the security shutters? One of our concerns has been really over the aesthetics for the property. And we noticed that with some of these properties, when you see these security shutters going in, and maybe for one establishment, it may not kind of take away from the appearance of the shopping center. But as other tenants begin to do it, we think it could possibly have a deleterious effect on the shopping center. And also the perception for, you know, customers that are frequent and are visiting the center that, you know, maybe this is not a place I want to be. And it kind of takes away from the overall aesthetics of the site. We did kind of take a look at, to kind of see what was driving the need for this. We do understand that stores like Xfinity and some of the cell phone stores and stuff, there's occasional smash and grabs that happen at those stores like jewelry stores and other places. So they're probably a little more susceptible than some of the other places to smash and grab type activity. But when we looked at examining some of the calls for service to that site, this is what we found between January of 2022 and December of 2023. So we looked at it for roughly a two year period. So there was about six calls there that were associated with grand theft and shoplifting at the site. And so in conclusion, our recommendation would be to go with the transparent security shutters. I know, I think there are representatives from Xfinity that are here, and they can speak on behalf as to why they're interested more so in the perforated shutters. Thank you, Mr. Holmes. First question. The code violations, those are other tenants on the property, right? That one doesn't have their business tax rate. That wasn't a code violation by Xfinity. I don't think it was Xfinity, no. It was not. So it was a fire and breaks? Yes, that was a, yes, that's correct. The second question I have, those break-ins that you were mentioning, were those break-ins overnight or were those during business hours or the thefts? Were those business hour thefts or someone breaking into the facility? I did talk to the staff member that got, we, we, it was not overnight. I think it was doing business hours. They come in and cut the cords off their phones and stuff like that. Correct. So none of those happen after hours? That's correct. Okay. Does, does the property have an alarm? I don't, I'll have to defer you to the, to the applicant to kind of give you some details on what their current security, you know, situation is at the site. I guess, do they have alarm? Do they have cameras? I don't know if I need to make Jennings disclosure. I haven't been there since this became an agenda item, but that parking lot is pitch dark. Their lighting is absolutely awful. We need to go over there and probably send code enforcement over there because, I don't know, if I was a tenant in there, I'd be very unhappy with my, with the landlord for the condition of those lights. And we have a lot of, you know, we have a lot of properties or a lot of commercial properties that they're not maintaining their lighting. I was just at the Grand Canyon and it's darker over there than it is at the Grand Canyon. And then I guess the other question is the, is the property, is it enrolled in the trespass program? I'm not sure. Okay. And the reason I'm asking these questions are none of these thefts have occurred by them, someone breaking into the property. But these other things I'm asking about the alarm system, camera system, lighting, their landlords not maintaining the lighting, is going to make this place a target. And the exact reason why staff is suggesting denial, I think making these things a prison. I've seen these, there's, there's an Xfinity store, I believe in Tamarack on University Drive. And I've driven by it and it looks awful. So I have some severe concerns regarding the effect, what people would think when they saw that, when that, when that building's closed. And the problem of the theft is not occurring at night. And so that, that's my comments. Council Member Horland. Thank you, Council President. I agree with most of what you said. And I believe that Stiles, that's the landlord in that property. That's correct. And the lighting is absolutely terrible over there. And I don't want to inhibit the ability of a business to protect themselves. And I, and I think it's an apt point that these incidents did not happen overnight. But there's the potential that they could happen overnight, especially with the, with the lack of lighting, proper lighting there. So I'm not opposed to having security shutters, but absolutely not the ones that were proposed. Now I'd like to hear from the applicant. I don't know if it's cost factor, but as to why they would be opposed to putting in something like the QMI, the, the more of the, they look almost like Venetian blind shutters. Right. Because I think that's much more, not only aesthetically, but I also think, and I think that was mentioned in the backup. I would be concerned if law enforcement were to respond to a call and they cannot see what's inside going on inside that store. So I think from a safety issue standpoint as well. So I'd like to hear from the applicant. That was a concern that, that staff had as, as well, because depending upon the lighting in the store, it can be very difficult, you know, to do surveillance on the property as, as well. But yeah, but I think there is a representative here. Good evening. Good evening. Hi. My name is Wendy Defoe. I am with the corporate store development team with Comcast with our brand Xfinity. And I'm Dawn Stagliano. I'm your local government affairs person. And you've all been sworn in? Yes. And you understand the proceedings? We do, yes. Okay. So can you ask, answer the question as to would you be opposed to putting in something like the QMI shutters as opposed to what you, you proposed? No problem. I can answer that question. First of all, I just want to just let you know that that is the standard that we use for all of our stores and our portfolio. Mm-hmm. The QMI shutter that you saw with the perforations. You can see through them into the store and we do provide night lighting in the stores, which basically will provide enough lighting that you should be able to see through the shutters. That's typically a code requirement for the night lighting. Okay. And I misspoke. I'm sorry. The QMI shutters are what you're proposing. Correct. But to staff's recommendation, could you possibly veer off of what you originally intended for that? And would you be amenable to putting in what staff's recommending? Oh, we could consider that. We've already manufactured the original shutters as that is typically our standard. Mm-hmm. And we're not typically having to go through a zoning review for these. Mm-hmm. Understanding this is a store that's been established in this jurisdiction for, I believe, probably somewhere around 10 years. Obviously, when we build a new store, this is part of our build. Mm-hmm. It goes through the typical, you know, review process. Right. But usually, we just gather landlord approval and put them in. Mm-hmm. So, obviously, we're following the jurisdictional requirements here. There is a significant increase in cost to go with the other system. Mm-hmm. But that's just the information. Okay. But you'd be amenable to that. And, again, I personally agree with staff. I think it's an aesthetic issue, but it's also a safety issue if anyone's responding with a call there. Sure. Right. I mean, obviously, we put these in all of our stores now as standard just to protect our assets. Sure. We're at risk. And we don't want to inhibit your ability to do that. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Is it based on the location, the aesthetics? Because I saw that two T-Mobile stores had the ones that we had proposed, and I just wondered if it was- I think that's not something that came before the council, so staff would have to answer that question. Okay. Yeah. Cue Mike. Oops. We'll be here eventually. Cue Mike put both of those in. The same vendor. Our vendor. They're the same vendor that does a majority of the security shutters. So they did express, they put it in at two T-Mobiles and one Kroger- Publix. Or Publix, I'm sorry, excuse me, in this jurisdiction. So we just wondered if it was property specific or- No. Okay. Well. Councilmember Reinstein. So my- If you are amenable to the change, then my questions won't matter. It sounded like you would prefer not to, and you know, in the backup it seemed that- It says that police did have no objection to the minor site plan modification. I'm curious because I heard when- when Council President Fadgen was- was asking about, well, when were those- those issues, those violations, those burglaries or whatever grant that- whatever it was, if those were during the day, then what's the purpose of the shutters? If the shutters haven't been there for some time, and I- I should add, I have been to that site. I wasn't at the site for the purpose of this- of- of this coming before Council, but to the extent it's necessary for Jennings Disclosure, I've been to that location, and to that shopping center, and it- it won't inhibit or change my- my decision today. Um, so I- I guess- I'm- I- my question is, um, that if you don't want to, um, agree to the change, and you want what- what is consistent, um, you didn't have it before, and it's- it hasn't been there for quite a while, and if the- the problems are during the day, what is the purpose that you're deciding to put it in now? Yeah, I can answer that. So that it's a brand standard now, and what we're going back over time is we're retrofitting all of our existing stores to put them in. So we have X amount of dollars allocated every year to do that. So this is part of the program to go back and retrofit. And- and the- the other, um, point really is more of a- more of a point and not a question to you is that, um, you know, when a- when a business comes before us and asks to do something that they think is in their best interest, um, unless it's gonna harm the shopping center, um, I- I- I'm normally inclined not to- not to question your- your business practice, and this really goes more to the question of notice. Um, is that, uh, and- and I discussed this with Mr. Holmes, is that, um, typically notice is sent, um, we- we talked about the- the perimeter, but it's sent to the property owner. Right. And, um, I'm always concerned, and I think I've raised this from the dais for other issues, is that a lot of times these property owners, um, couldn't care less, or they don't pay attention to it, or they're absent, or whatever it may be. It may not be the case with this particular property owner, but this property owner didn't seem to respond. So, I don't know if the property owner didn't respond, because they don't have a problem with what you'd like to do. Um, I would like to see- and this is maybe more of a code issue- is that the tenants get noticed, because my biggest concern- this is not for you. Yeah, yeah. This is- is that, you know, right next door is a restaurant, and, um, I'd like to know what their position is on it, because, you know, we could sit up here and say, aesthetically, we don't think it looks great, but if the restaurant next door that may be the most affected by having something that doesn't look nice, has no problems with it, and the property owner and the other- the other tenants have no problem, then, um, I- I don't like to second-guess a- a business- um, business decision in that- that regard. So, um, I- I'm kind of just throwing those out there, because I- I- I like to see some of that taken into consideration for going forward. And- and maybe- maybe the administration can respond to at least that point. I- I agree with you that we should not be in the business of determining- determining how they market their business. Their professionals- and this is part marketing of- of everything. More about- So I agree with you, but the notice- the notice thing is well- is- is well noted, and we'll talk about it. Thank you. Um, well, I don't see this being marketing, but I- I- I think it has a detrimental impression that this will have on that block. Um, so, it hasn't been an issue. The- the- the theft issues is a different problem. It needs to be addressed a different way. Um, so, I don't know. Um, any other comments? Go ahead, Councilmember Reinstein. I- I- I'm just- again, just thinking out loud in terms of some of my concerns is that I would still like to hear what, um, the restaurant next door's position is on this. Um, that- and- and it may not sway anybody and it may be unnecessary. Right. I understand what you're saying, but, uh, they weren't required to let the- the restaurant know. No, no. No, they weren't. I think they should- No, wait, wait, wait. No, if we- I understand you- you think they should. I- you know, I don't think that should be part of the consideration whether this is approved or disapproved. That's a matter for future. We have to set the rules to say that that's what we want. I- we can't have them- they're already here expending money, um, pleading their case. We can't tell them no until we hear about the restaurant. Well- because that's not the rules that we set for them to come in here. May I? Yeah. Um- Thought we're having a conversation? Yeah, thank you. No, no, I appreciate it. My- my only thought in that regard is that, um, and that's why I first asked that if the applicant- they- they've already- it sounds like they've already, um, what's the- constructed, created, built, you- You've- purchased it, manufactured it. Um, so it is a cost expense to them to- to have to now manufacture something different since this is standard throughout all their stores. So, um, you know, I guess the question is what affects you more, right? Is that, um, tabling it now to give- to ask the restaurant, maybe that would sway some other people's opinion? Or just let it, you know, let it vote and maybe- maybe you'd be forced then to manufacture something new. I- I don't know what is more harmful to your business. I just don't want to hurt your business, um, I- either way or the business next door. That- that's where I'm thinking in terms of the- it- it- we can actually put this off. All right. So that a decision- Okay. Then what I would suggest is make a motion and see if you get a second. Well, that's why I- I was asking first. Oh, okay. Maybe the applicant could give me a little more insight into, you know, the- the- the trouble it would cause them to manufacture a new one and the cost factor. Um, I mean the- They're manufactured before approval. Correct. It's gonna cost them. I understand and that's- maybe- maybe this council would think differently if the restaurant next door or if the other property owner. I- I don't know. Um, I guess the question- why was it manufactured before approval? It's their standard throughout all their stores. It's our standard. Well, you mean like- I mean we typically- in our- my experience doing this, I've built most of our stores in our portfolio. We typically don't have to go through zoning. Right. We typically go through landlord approval and we proceed- we do have landlord approval on these. So we did proceed with the manufacturing process. At that point is where this came up. So Danny, why- why are they here? Why- why do we require this? She's saying other jurisdictions don't- don't make them. That's what I'm saying. So you're saying the windows in that facility are the exact same windows in every, um, store? No, every store is slightly different. So there's nothing basically custom to this store? Well, the shutters are all custom because they're custom fit for these specific windows. Okay, but then that goes back to the question I asked. Why did we pre-manufacture when it's a custom, um, fit? So you- you manufactured and then you determined that you were supposed to come through our zoning for- For zoning. For us. Okay. Correct. And why are they here? Like, why- why does other jurisdictions don't do this? Some of them- some of them when you get to the interior of the building itself and- and, uh, outside of the window itself, we don't generally- in terms of, like, signage or whatever, what- whatever types of signage you may put within the store. So, what is it, 31, 32 municipalities in Broward? Oh, it's- 31. 31. Yes. Um, are we the only one? I- I don't know. I didn't, uh, do an analysis of- of that. Okay. All right. Um, any other comments? Mr. Mayor? Danny was about to say something and we cut him off. I'm sorry. What were you gonna say, Danny? Uh, in terms of the, um, well, I- I was just pointing out the section of the code that, uh, he'd asked. Uh, it's- it's section 2750H2 that, uh, sort of, uh, kind of governs that. That we kind of take a look at. Okay. Uh, item. Council Member Reynstein, would you like to make your motion? I mean, the- it didn't- it didn't sound like there's much support. I mean, you know, I mean, that- listen, the- the- the- the motion- the motion is to, uh, motion is to, uh, uh, approve as requested by the applicant and- and not with the exception requested by the, uh, section VB. Um, I'm not sure how else to- I think that's the motion. You want the motion to check with the restaurant? No. That would be a table. I mean, that would be, you know, I- I don't mind doing that. Um, if there's gonna be a second to it, then I would make the motion to the table. Well, you gotta ask. Um, and- and- and that goes- and that's, again, that went back to the applicants that if you- if, uh, if, uh, if it's more damaging to your business to have to, um, you know, you'd rather wait more time to see if you get the approval instead of risk- and not being approved, then I would make the motion to table it so that we can ask, uh, we can send the notice out further and get some more insight from, uh, the neighboring tenants. Okay. So is there a second? Uh, is- did that- is that you making the motion? That's the motion to table. Is there a second for that? May I suggest tabling it to a time certain? To our next meeting. Will that- will that be enough time to reach out to the tenant and get their input? We can pull the, uh, uh, just pull the addresses of- of the various, um, uh, base there, tenants there, and, uh, notify them of- of the request. Typically, this is because the, the, uh, the landlord is actually the tenant, the applicant that allows them to actually apply, uh, for this application. Uh, we look at the, the, you know, we would notify the property owner because they are the applicant. May I would suggest? May I would suggest? Okay. I'm considering supporting it, but could we- could we approve it on- what's- what's the name of the clear ones called? The other- could we approve- give the- the applicant the option that we would approve the clear, but they could also wait to see, um, what the outcome is of the- So it's essentially table. I guess it would be tabled, regardless. But if it was tabled, and then two weeks later, or- or a month later, we meet and approve the metal- the non-clear ones, Q-whatever, the- QMI, um, they could then choose which way they want to do it. Because we could approve the clear ones now. It would sound like what you're saying is that they could change their mind and decide to ignore the pre-manufactured one and go with the- the one that is- It's a big- it lets there be a business decision if they want to- if they want to wait it out and see what they say, or they want to proceed with a more expensive option. So it could be a lot more money because they- they already expended the money for what was planning on going up, and the new ones, I assume, are more money to begin with. So it's more than double. Yes, agreed. Yeah. Which is the- the purpose of why I'm raising this issue. Yeah. Um, Council Member Horland? I think the question before the motion to table proceeds is to, um, find out if- if it's- ask Council Members if it will change their decision. Because I'd hate to see us further delay this and table it if, um, there's not a consensus here that they want to hear from the business. I have- Yeah, I know you were. I- I'm trying to help you. I do not see how this addresses the theft issue, because there hasn't been any theft issues after hours. And I do- I've- you know, I've driven by your property. I think it's Tamarack. Um, I've- I've seen it from the road. And, um, I know that we're proposing a different type, but I do think it'll have a detrimental effect on the plaza, in my opinion. And it's not solving a problem. Your theft problem is a different problem. Although, I do- the reason I was asking the question is, do you have an alarm system? And I think that was kind of rhetorical, because obviously you have an alarm system. Do you have cameras? I think that's rhetorical. You guys sell cameras as a service. So, if you didn't have cameras, like, why don't you have cameras? And then, the lighting, I think you need to talk to your landlord, because I don't know if you've driven by your property or your- your store at night. It's pitch dark. It's terrible. And then, the last thing is the trespassing. There is an issue across the street. It's looking like San Francisco over there. Um, I'm very concerned about it. And at times, there's panhandlers at the entrance of that property. Um, we need to make sure that people are not congregating there. They're there to- Where's he talking about? Uh, patronize the businesses and stuff like that. So, um, at the McDonald's. Um, the trespassing, uh, is a tool that our police department can use to make sure that people that are up to no good can move. So, I think those are things that can help mitigate what your concern could happen outside of business hours. But this request doesn't address your theft issues because you haven't had a theft issue by someone driving through your door. And I think if someone's driving through the door, they're going to go through that cage anyway. But that's- that's how I feel. That was- But I don't fault- I don't fault them for trying to be proactive. I- I don't either. And if they're retro- vetting the store. So, I just- I- I don't either, but- It's not going to change my opinion, um, what the- Personally, if- when I see areas that have a bunch of shutters up, it just sends a message that it's a rough area. Yeah. And that's not a rough area. It's not a rough area. Can I- a couple- Wait, wait, wait, wait. Um, click in, please. Sorry. I was still clicked in. I wasn't really done. So, that's why- Councilmember- That's why I kept talking. I never finished. Well, that's okay. You're usually very quiet, so. I was- I was- I was- I'm sorry. Councilmember Andreu. Thank you. Can I- The minor site plan revision for Xfinity? Well, we already have a motion. He didn't get seconded. Well, he- Councilmember Anderson was still considering it. Councilmember Weinstein, what- Were you just saying to table it and contact the restaurants and then come back with the answer? I didn't- Yes. The- the- the concern that, uh, of the aesthetic nature of it, um, to have shutters that are for non-business hours, right? It's when the business is closed, uh, which is primarily at night, um, that if that doesn't bother the other tenants, um, it doesn't bother me. I mean, I'm- I'm in that shopping center all that time, too, at night to go to the restaurant as well. So, um, I don't see, you know, if we were talking about the shutters being down during the daytime, during business hours, that would be concerning. Um, but- and correct me if I'm wrong, the applicant is that this is to be there during closed hours only, right? I mean, that really makes sense. Um, so, to me, it would be supportive of the applicant's position that, um, that they're comfortable with their business decision if it didn't, um, negatively impact the businesses next door, which I think was the concern regarding the aesthetic nature of it and the sense that it would be, you know, uh, have a- put a- a bad sense on the whole shopping center. And- and, uh, it's even- they've- we've already heard that, um, that they are only here before us because the property owner has already given them approval. So, the- the initial comments that, um, well, what is the property owner's position? Well, we- they've already testified. They've- they've already said here that, um, they're only here because the property owner's already authorized it from their perspective. I think to answer Councilmember Horland, I really don't see how this- I don't think it'll change my opinion. Um, because I don't think it's mitigating a problem. The problem is happening at other hours, unfortunately. Um, so, I guess- I don't know if we need to discuss it. We just either- I'm not gonna second the tabling. Is anybody gonna second the tabling? That's where we're at right now. Councilmember Andrea, I said nodding no. I don't think Councilmember Anderson. Okay. So, that fails. Um, can we have a motion to vote on it, whether negatively or positively? Well, you have- does she have to remake it? Because we were- we had an open motion without a second, which- Well, there- right- the motion to table fails for a lack of a second. Right. There is another motion that has been put forth on the floor to deny if somebody wanted to second that motion. Second. Okay. Um, I don't see any other comments from the dais. Is there any comments from the chamber? Just- just a point of order. Okay. The- the motion to deny is to deny the entire- the- the application, or to deny the application with the recommendation by- I just wanna be clear as to what you're seeking to deny. We're voting it down. A yes is- we're- we're- we're denying it. Right. Right. Denying the entire application, regardless of what the- um, what the recommendation was of- The recommendation was the deny. Well, it was except if they're- approved the shutter. I mean, they- sometimes they say it differently, right? They- Okay. Proved except, but I- I just wanna- Council Member Andreu, what are we voting? What's the motion? The motion is to deny the minor site plan revision for Xfinity as proposed by the applicant. And- and, uh, Council Member Horland, you agree for your second? Yeah. Okay. Um, I don't see any more comments. Council Member- uh, just promoted you. Um- Is it though? Ms. Begaro, please call the roll. Council- You don't want this job. No. So I said, is it though? Council Member Horland? Yes. Council Member Reinstein? No. Council Member Anderson? Yes. Council Member Andreu? Yes. Council Member Fajan? Yes. Thank you. Items 16 and 17, I'm assuming we're gonna present together? Okay. So item 16, PP230054, consideration of a request to approve a zoning waiver for Toy Spa Academy. The property is located at 9739 West Broward Boulevard in Zone B-2P Central Business. Item 17, PP230054, consideration of a request to approve a use variance for Toy Spa Academy. The property is located at 9739 West Broward Boulevard in Zone B-2P Central Business. Okay. Thank you very much. As indicated, this is a request for a use variance approval to allow a vocational school, Beauty Academy, to occupy 5,327 square feet of tenant space within a B-2P zoning district, and also to allow parking variance to reduce the required parking for the site from 188 parking spaces to a total of 159 parking spaces. The property is located at 9739 West Broward Boulevard, which is located there. Just west of, what is it, Central Park Place? Yeah. Yes. And I will, I'm gonna come back to this graphic. You'll see that there are some other academies that are located within the city. I will come back to that graphic a little later in the presentation. The agent for this is John Voigt. The size of the property is approximately 4.6 acres. Again, B-2P zoning district. The existing use is commercial, and the adjacent zoning districts are PRD 15Q to the northwest and east, and PRD 25Q to the south. This is an aerial photo kind of showing the site itself and the surrounding area. Again, you can see the area, the parcel in question here, and you can see the residential parcel surrounding it, and you also see the notification boundary there in purple. So, in terms of the overall analysis, the proposed use, we did look at the criteria for the variance. We did find that the proposed use was generally compatible with the site plan, the physical development of the district, and the surrounding property. The proposed use variance was generally in harmony with the general character and existing structures for the subject property, district, and surrounding property, and that vocational school use is a permitted use within the commercial land use plan designation. So, it meets those criteria of the code. I wanted to kind of hone in a little, get a little closer in terms of the aerial photo. This is the approximate location of the bay. As indicated earlier in a previous item where we discussed whether we wanted to amend the code or not, the applicant was a toy nail spa that was previously located there. They have relocated to the plantation walk shopping center, leaving this bay vacant. They have, they're proposing a beauty academy to locate within the site. That beauty academy has a higher parking requirement and is also not a permitted use within the district, which is why they're seeking the use variance, and I'll get into the specifics of the parking in just a moment. I wanted to point out that while our code does in terms of the parking, it looks at the overall gross acreage of the parcel itself, and we determine the parking based upon the gross acreage. One of the things that the applicant wanted us to take into consideration, this is the bay itself. They kind of grade some areas out that they kind of call areas that are not really a part of the overall beauty school, or where the instruction will take place itself. So the net usable area is kind of the wide area in here where you see administrative offices, classrooms, or what have you. And one of the points that they made to us was that they're really only using, in terms of net usable area, about 3,432 square feet, and not the 5,327 square feet, which we're basing our parking count on. But unfortunately, our code does require that we look at the gross square footage. In terms of the parking itself, again, with the 5,327 square feet, the parking ratio for vocational trade school was one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area, requiring a total of 53 spaces. The previous salon that was there, based upon that same square footage, had a different parking ratio of one space per 300 square feet. So the previous salon required 17 spaces, whereas the current vocational school would require 53 spaces, which has additional parking requirement for them to operate the beauty school. The applicant did undertake a parking utilization study, just to provide us some additional information about parking within the plaza. The parking counts for their utilization study were done over a three-day period between September 14, 2023 and September 16, 2023. That was a Thursday, Friday, Saturday, just to give you some idea of what days of the week the study took place. And they did the parking count between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. in kind of 30-minute intervals. So every 30 minutes, they'd go back and kind of examine how much parking was being demanded at each particular interval of time. In general, they found that the study indicates that 50% or more parking spaces were available on the Thursday and Friday between the 6.30 p.m. and 9 p.m. at night. Also on Saturday between 9 a.m. and 9.30 a.m. There were more than 50% of the spaces available. And again on Saturday between 1.30 p.m. and 9 o'clock p.m. on Saturday. So during those intervals, they did find that there was more than 50% of the spaces in the plaza were open and available for parking. At no point during the study were all parking spaces ever occupied. A minimum of 29 spaces were always available on all three days. That was another summary or point that they identified as part of the parking study. And the applicant also indicates that practical training will not exceed more than 20 students at any time. And the other point that they wanted to emphasize was that classes will be staggered throughout the school hours from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. So that they won't have classes continuously through those operating hours 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. As they indicated, this request, we're looking at two items here. The other request deals with the request for a parking waiver. So they're requesting a waiver from Section 27-123 of the code, which requires 188 parking spaces for the parking table that we showed you a little earlier. And there the applicant is requesting to reduce the required parking from the 188 parking spaces to 159 parking spaces, which is a 15.4% reduction in the overall parking. The applicant, in addition to the parking utilization, also kind of did a little marketing analysis as well. The study indicated that there was a lack of qualified beauty technicians in the area, and that's why they were seeking to establish a beauty school at this location. The study identified two other cosmetology schools within the city. The Paul Mitchell is located at the Brower Mall, which is about 2.8 miles from this site, and also there's a Florida Barber Academy at the Westgate Shopping Center, which is located about 6.1 miles from the proposed location. We also note that the staff has not received any written citizen comments or any objections to the proposed application. I go back to this map again, just kind of showing you, this is the proposed site here, this is where the Paul Mitchell site is right here, the Brower Mall, and this is where the Florida Barber Academy is located. So, in conclusion, in terms of staff's overall analysis, again, in terms of compatibility, we find that the proposed use variance is compatible with the surrounding development patterns, and zoning designation meets that criteria. It is in compliance, general compliance with the city's comprehensive plan. It is consistent with the zoning code, particularly sections 2741, which deals with the notice of the zoning measures that was done. Section 2753, which is the overall use variance criteria, which we examined. We find that it meets those criteria. And Section 2752 G2, which is a practical difficulty waiver, which applies to the parking waiver request. So, in conclusion, we would recommend approval of the use variance in the parking waiver. Thank you, Mr. Holmes. Councilmember Horland. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm prepared to make a motion to approve item 16, to approve the zoning waiver. I just wanted to say that, first of all, that was a very detailed parking study. And I liked the way, the back and forth between staff and the engineer on that. I'm comfortable with the parking requirements only because, as the applicant stated, there's not going to be any more than 20 attendees in there at a time. And I think many of us have probably been in that parking lot. It is a little tight. But I think it will be less than what they typically service. This is a small business owner that's chosen to invest in this city. And I think that this adds value when we're looking at the job market and the challenge in getting qualified job applicants. I think that this will provide a great service to the community. So, as I said, I'm prepared to make a motion to approve this first item. Councilmember Reinstein. First, I want to make a Jennings disclosure, because if I recall when Toy Spa had its ribbon cutting, I did discuss with the owner that they were going to be looking to do this. So, it did come up in discussion. So, just for clarity, I'll make that Jennings disclosure, although it won't affect my decision here today. I think approving the waiver request is consistent with what we've been doing all along in terms of the parking space issue and that we seem to require an overabundance of parking. The only thing that I would add is that I did catch that the traffic count that was done on September 14th, 15th, and 16th. I don't think it affects my decision in any way, but it happened to be the Jewish holiday of Rosh Hashanah. And so, because there's a synagogue in that parking lot, they would not have been driving during those days. Let me point something out, though. That property is really not a part of the area that was analyzed. It's off to the side. But if you were observant of those holidays, you wouldn't be in the shopping center either. Although, it just caught my attention, the dates, but I don't think it changes anything in terms of the request by the applicant. So, what is this academy? Nails? Anything else? Like, what does it teach? They kind of show on the actual floor plan kind of some of the things that they'll be doing. So, hair, nails, washings, facials. I can't see. So, it's... And those other academies, they do the same thing? Are they different things? Or... I don't know if those other academies do... Are they directly competing with each other? I don't know how much of the services overlap with... All right. I don't think I have an issue with the parking. If it's... Are they going to... Could they accommodate more than 20 people at a time? If the thing was like... Or... That's really all they could really accommodate, if they knock it out of the park. That would be a good question. That's something that, really, I'd have to have... But usually the building officials, they look at these plans, they would determine what the occupancy would be. And I guess the last question is like, you know, we had this conversation whether we wanted, you know, these vocational facilities to be conditional, come through this process. I mean, is there a detrimental reason of a vocational school coming in? I can't think of any, but I don't see how this could be negative for the plaza or the surrounding community. I'm just... I was going to say, for that property, I don't see any real... It's small in nature. The plaza is still relatively commercial in nature. And, you know, I don't really see any real detrimental impacts from the proposed use. I don't see any other questions. Did... Council Member Horland made a motion. I'll second. Yeah, go ahead. I'll second the motion. Is there anybody from the chamber who would like to speak? Joe, you want to speak? Joe, you want to speak? All right, come on up. Were you sworn in? I was, yes. All right, very good. Joe in, 944 Northwest 92nd Terrace. All right. Well, I think this is cool. I actually live near this area and have been in that shopping center a number of times. I think just in a general sense, bringing in things that put people in a place that also has opportunities to have a nice drink at Ali's, the coffee shop nearby, or the Asian wrap and bowl place in the corner. These are good for their businesses as well because it keeps people in that area. And also the Italian spot there as well. I think this is kind of the, you know, work play sense of live work play. And this is kind of that idea of starting to make sure that we're kind of bringing things together and bringing people together. As far as parking tends to go, this center was built a long time ago, and we typically overbuild the parking everywhere we go. So I'm not too concerned about the volume on that. That was a good catch. Council member Reinstein on the holiday. But they do have a little bit of their extra lot as well there, I believe, as well. But that was a good catch. But yes, that that general spot, I think we want to support businesses coming in, training people as well, creating new opportunities for new people. New opportunities for new jobs and facilitating support of other businesses that are already in that area. As well as potentially being a nice place for those people to walk and work from as well in that area that I also live nearby. That's all. Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. I just did a quick Google toy spas. There's about 10 of them in South Florida. So that would imply that this school, it will be the farm club training ground for them to get employees throughout the area. Okay. Just so you know. Any other comments from the chamber? Ms. Beggarro, can you call the roll for number 16? Council member Horland. Yes. Council member Reinstein. Yes. Council member Anderson. Yes. Council member Andrew. Yes. Council member Fajan. Yes. Can we have a motion for 17? A motion to approve. Second. Ms. Beggarro, can you call the roll? Council member Horland. Yes. Council member Reinstein. Yes. Council member Anderson. But can I just, I'm sorry. Could I add to your, again, there was some conditional use pursuant to those staff recommendations, because I think they needed to correct some code violations. Just want that on the record. Yeah. I know. You want to be specific about that. I always say that it's assumed, but yes. I will amend my motion to state predicated upon the staff recommendation. I'll accept the second. Do we want to redo the roll? Okay. Ms. Beggarro, if you want to redo the roll. Council member Horland. Yes. Council member Reinstein. Yes. Council member Anderson. Yes. Council member Andrew. Yes. Council member Fajan. Yes, yes, because I didn't get the vote twice. Thank you. I'm assuming 18 and 19 we're going to do together? Yes. P.P. 230043 consideration of request to approve landscape waivers for Plantation General FSER. Properties located at 4100 Northwest 4th Street and 391 North State Road 7 in our Zone BHCS, Gateway Healthcare Services. And 19, P.P. 230043 consideration of request for site plan approval for Plantation General FSER. Properties located at 4100 Northwest 4th Street and 391 North State Road 7 in our Zone BHCS, Gateway Healthcare Services. Okay. Last but not least, application P.P. 230043, this is a request for site plan elevation landscape plan approval to construct a new 10,860 square foot freestanding emergency room. There are also two landscape waivers as part of this request. So this is a location map of the city. The property, as you can see, is located. There are kind of two parcels here, 4100 Northwest 4th Street and 391 North State Road 7. And that's the location of the parcel. The agent for this is Stefano Viola. The parcel in question is about 2.7 acres in size. The underlying zoning is the city's BHCS, which is the Gateway Healthcare Services District. The existing parcel is a vacant parcel. It basically is comprised of a parking lot at this time. The underlying land use is the city's local activity center. And the surrounding zoning districts to the north, west, and south are also BHCS, west, which is the health care services. And to the east is the city's AM, which is the Auto Mall zoning designation. This is an aerial photo kind of showing the property there. And then you see our notification boundary there as the purple boundary with the notification boundary. This is the site plan for the site. So as you can see here, State Road 7 is located approximately here. So you would enter the site off of 4th Street and come in through the site here. There's parking that would be available here. And as you kind of go west on the site, there's one way. This is where the emergency vehicles would actually enter and take emergency patients into the building here. This is one way. This is an egress point that was added as part of the overall site. I'm going to show you something that we've been kind of working on. We're trying to progress our technology here. So you'll get a chance to kind of see this development from a kind of 3D perspective. This is going to kind of help us in the future do better analysis, ensuring that, you know, in terms of height, bulk area, things of that sort that these proposed developments sort of fit. So we're going to kind of show off some of the work of Sean LeMay, some of the things that he's been doing. So, yeah, this is the importance of GIS. So you can kind of see, you know, the surrounding area and you can kind of see the height and bulk of the surrounding buildings. And we're going to kind of zoom in on that and you'll get a closer perspective of the proposed emergency room there. And so you can kind of see how well it's, how compatible, how well it kind of fits in to the site there. So just one of the new toys and some of the things you'll see coming your way. But we've been working on this. This was the first site that we kind of worked on it. And we wanted to kind of show you kind of where we were with that. So thank you very much, Mr. LeMay. He still playing? Yes, yes. Oh, he loves this stuff. So he could play with this all day long. So absolutely. Yeah, yeah, yes. So very nice. Out of a lot of trial and error, we finally got it to work. Thanks to IT for their help as well. So, yeah. So again, so that's the site plan you just saw from 3D. This is kind of a perspective. This gives you the northeast perspective, which kind of shows the main entrance there to the building. This is the northwest perspective where the emergency drop off would be. And this kind of just shows you the material schedule and the color palette that we were working from for the for the property. This kind of shows the landscape plan for the site, the floor plan that's located here. And in terms of the overall site circulation, this is another thing that we're trying to pay a lot more attention to in terms of pedestrian access and around the site. So the area in green is pretty much the existing pedestrian, you know, pedestrian movement. It's approved around the site. So the area in blue is kind of what we've added to kind of tie into that existing pedestrian network. And then what you see here in yellow is just the existing crosswalk and kind of shows you how all that kind of comes together. And we have paying attention to our ADA access into the slopes and stuff. So you can kind of see that we've paid a lot of attention to make sure it's a truly accessible site. And we're also showing what the transit transit connectivity to the proposed site is as well. In terms of parking, the parking for this type facility is determined by the number of rooms. So this will they will have 11 rooms. The parking requirement is two spaces per room. So the overall requirement is 22 spaces. The applicant is proposing 44 spaces. So there is an abundance of parking there. And just to kind of break that down, there'll be 33 regular spaces for ADA spaces. And we'll even have seven future EV capable spaces at the site as well. As I indicated, there are two landscape waivers that are associated with the proposed site. The first waiver, as you would know, deals with the landscape pedestrian zone. And it's for the landscape pedestrian zone on the west, south and the east side of the building. With regard to the west facade, the required LPZ would be 10 feet. The applicant is proposing to provide zero feet there. In terms of the south facade, which is along here, again, 10 feet requirement. The applicant is proposing to provide a 6.1 foot LPZ. And again, with the east facade, again, 10 feet would be required. The applicant is proposing to provide zero feet there. And then the second waiver kind of deals with the interior landscape islands. The requirement here would be a minimum of 12 feet for the landscape island from inside curb to inside curb. These two areas that you see in blue here, the applicant is proposing to provide interior islands that would be between 10.9 feet and 7.4 feet. I think the 10.9 foot island is here. And most of the islands in here are about 7.4 feet in width. So that's the second landscape variance that's being proposed. And just some other general information, community meetings. The applicant did hold the community meeting on November 28, 2023 at the Jim Ward Community Center. There were eight people in attendance at the meeting. We also want to note that, to date, the department has not received any objections to this application. We did kind of, because there was some interest that was expressed in this from residents of Lauderhill. So we did contact some of the residents of Lauderhill and surrounding properties to let them know of the proposed development. It was one of their council members as well, Commissioner Lawrence, was contacted by the Community Redevelopment Administrator. And I know that he's been a part of this and has provided some input as well into the proposed site plan. And finally, there are no violations issued for the subject site at this time. And based upon that, staff finds that the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding development patterns. It's in compliance with the comprehensive plan and is consistent with the following sections of the land development regulations. And based upon that, we would recommend approval. And the applicant is here to answer any questions that you might have. Very good. Thank you. Anybody have any comments? Motion to approve. Council Member Horland. I'm just going to make a very quick comment. I know it's in the backup, but while the representative is here, I did speak to some of those residents who attended the meeting. And again, they just want to reiterate, they're excited about this, but they're just concerned about the remaining property. And we told them that there's, you know, we're hoping for things in the future. They just want to make sure that there's no criminal activity or, you know, unhoused people taking, you know, refuge back there. So whatever we can do to protect that neighborhood, I'd appreciate it. Thank you. Second. Okay. So Council Member Andreu made the motion. Council Member Reinstein seconded. Does anybody in the chamber like to make any comments? Which is subject to VB, Staff of Comments, right? Was that Council Member Andreu's motion? I think he's breaking your message. Understood. What does VB stand for? Section. That's the section of the code. Section B. 5B. It's Roman kind of. Motion to approve. Subject to staff conditions noted in section V point B. You accept that? Yes. Second again. Ms. Begarow called the roll. Council Member Horland. Yes. Council Member Reinstein. Yes. Council Member Andreu. Yes. Council Member Fajan. Yes. Can we have a motion for 19? Motion to approve item 19, pending staff comments. Second. Ms. Begarow, can you call the roll? Council Member Horland. Yes. Council Member Reinstein. Yes. Council Member Anderson. Yes. Council Member Andreu. Yes. Council Member Fajan. Yes. Thank you. Mayor Sordal, administrative update. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. First off, University of Plantation. Long Awaited begins on next Thursday. Do we need to notice it if we're going to have more than one Council Member there? Or what is your take? Well, typically, just because you're going to have more than one Council Member there, wouldn't require you to notice it unless you're going to take minutes of the meeting. No, no. As long as you're cautioned with your- Somebody floated the idea to me, so I thought I'd spit it out. As long as you, again, as long as there's not going to be any communications about matters that may foreseeably come before Council, then there's no Sunshine Law violation. Sounds good. And our first speaker will be procurement. You won't be there for procurement. Oh, man. We would have scheduled an extra hour if you'd have been there. Damn it. Number two, I had a resident talk to me making an excellent point about our crosswalks. I'm going to be talking to Samira-in-Chief about it. Right now, if you walk into a crosswalk, it's take your life in your hands. People don't know what crosswalks mean. And I think we can do better educating. So that's probably going to be a point of emphasis coming from me. Oh, number three, you guys got something from Gregory. There's a nice seminar on the second- workshops on the Friday and the Thursday is something. It is an invite. We have five tickets. So Councilmember Reinstein brought up the point. Is this something that you're merely being informed of or are you being invited? I'm just going to tell you verbally. You'll be invited to this one. The first panel is how Greater Fort Lauderdale can address affordability and mobility challenges through collaboration and includes Gregory Stewart on the panel. And the second one is business, housing, and schools, balancing demand and smart growth. And Michelle Gomez is on that one. So it's a pretty good thing. Get with Gregory. I'm out of town next weekend for these. So if you want to go, get with Gregory. And number, the last thing is it looks like our governor once again denied. I sent a request to carve out Broward in his executive order so that we could go after Serenage. Because right now the permits are right there and it's being pointed out that they're still rebuilding from the hurricane. So I'm going to Tallahassee Tuesday and Councilmember Horland will be up there too, I hope. And you too. Okay. So I got an appointment with Kevin Guthrie at 830 because the Division of Emergency Management is the one that counsels Governor DeSantis on how to sign these things. And we've heard Guthrie talk before. He's a great talker, great guy. So let's get in and thank you all for tracking that down, building track down, kind of who's the real decision maker. So I'm going to try to get in front of him, see if we can take a shot and see if we can go after Serenage and get that thing rolling. So that's all I got. Thank you, Mayor. Item 20, Advisory Board Vacancy Appointments. Does anybody have any appointments to make? I do. Can I go for this? Okay. Do I have to get approval? I want to move Pete Tincham from Fire Pension Board to the Employee Pension Board because Mr. Stewart has resigned. And I also want to reappoint Timothy J. Fadgen. Congratulations. Thank you. So was my term up? I don't know. No, it wasn't. I think it's a two-year term. I don't know. I appreciate the reappointment. Anyway, I don't know if we have to vote or not. Motion to approve. Okay. Thank you. Second. Yeah. Because it's my appointment to the board. I think you guys have to approve that one. Council Member Reinstein. Thank you. This one is for Parks. Wait, wait, wait. Do we have to? I thought you were making a comment. No, no. Okay. We'll go down the line. Sorry about that. Excuse me. Are you going to finish the motion that was just made? So we had a motion in a second. Yeah. I forgot who made the motion. I made the motion. Oh, okay. I think I got one more. Okay. Are you still voting? One at a time. I got two alternates to Parks and Rec. Are you still voting on this? I'm sorry. Ms. Beggereau, call the roll. Unless you don't want us to do it that way. How do you want us to do it? I didn't know we had more. Are you on the way? What's going to make it easier? Go ahead and make your... Should we make all of them and we make one motion for all of his appointments? Well, I think this one requires a vote and the other ones do not. So I think you vote on this one. We've been voting on these. Let's just vote on this one because we already have a motion in a second. The rest of them do them and... Okay. Yeah. Okay. Ms. Beggereau, call the roll. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andrew? Yes. Councilmember Fajan? Yes. So I now have an opening on the fire board. I have some good candidates, but if you have ideas, let me know. Okay. The Parks and Rec Board, Roy Grimsland and Peter Staszewski. I've sent their info to April already. They are to be my two alternates on Parks and Rec. Thank you very much. So what do you want to do? I don't think you vote on those. We do vote on them. Okay. Motion to approve. Second. There should be a vote. Ms. Beggereau, call the roll. Hang on a second. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andre? Yes. Councilmember Anderson, you said you have an appointment? No. Oh, okay. Councilmember Andrea? I do. I would like to check with Mr. Holmes because we had so much conversation tonight about the Affordable Housing Advisory Board, and I thought I could appoint a mortgage broker, but I want to just confirm that with you before I make the appointment. There is banking. Do we have that open? Okay. Yes. Okay. I want to make sure after that lengthy conversation earlier. I would like to appoint Tasha Renee Drummond for affordable housing. Motion to approve. Second. Ms. Beggereau, call the roll. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andreu? Yes. Councilmember Fajan? Yes. Councilmember Reinstein? I have an appointment to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. You know, some appointments are a little more exciting than others. She was one of my students when I was a teacher, and she now lives here, and she's a personal trainer. I have two kids, so it's exciting to make that appointment. You're old. Thanks for reminding me. Motion to approve. Second. Ms. Beggereau, call the roll. Councilmember Horland? Yes. Councilmember Reinstein? Yes. Councilmember Anderson? Yes. Councilmember Andreu? Yes. Councilmember Fajan? Yes. All right. Comments by Councilmembers? Let's start with Councilmember Horland. Thank you. I know everyone's tired. I'm going to keep it as brief as I can. Come on. First, I want to thank Chief Harrison for further fleshing out my argument against going to a school-based policing model. It was a very long school board meeting on one issue yesterday, and we got a zero to nine vote. What I was most proud of was the effect of communication that we saw and the collaboration from other municipalities, League of Cities, we decided or I decided to take a quieter approach and contact the board members individually. Others went public, and I think it all worked together, and we got, I think, what's going to keep our schools the safest. So that was a great collaboration. So thank you again, Chief, for that and for administration support. I just want to give you a brief update, and I think what I'm going to do is follow up with an email tomorrow because I don't want to keep anyone, but the reason I was late is I was on the first advocacy meeting when I was walking in the door tonight. Legislative session started yesterday amidst tornado warnings. I hope that's not foreshadowing what the session will look like, but there are three items there coming for our revenue sources in three big ways, and it's concerning. So what I'm going to mention to you is they're trying to repeal the license, business tax license. Rep. Botana is trying to take that away from us. There is a constitutional amendment they're proposing. It's two phases on homestead exemption. And what I will tell you, and I'll give you more details in an email tomorrow, it's a tax shift. It is basically what they really need to do is address other issues like property tax, property insurance, but this will affect our bottom line. But it's not going to save the residents as much as they're proposing. And it's going to really affect what we're concerned about with League of Cities. It's going to affect affordable housing because what's going to happen, it's going to pass the burden to non-homesteaded properties. So if you have rental properties, and then what's going to happen, that's going to be passed on to the renters. So we need to look at the big picture. The other thing that affects us is two utility bills. And one of them, basically, they're looking at our back-end costs that we take from our enterprise fund to fund anything that the city supplies to utilities. So, you know, that could be HR, whatever that is. They're looking to put a cap on that and prevent us from taking those funds back in general funds. So, again, very brief, but those are three concerns right now on day two of the session. We'll be up there, as the mayor said, next week starting to fight some of these. But one thing that I'm going to ask everybody, staff is great as giving me data. In order to tell our story most efficiently, which I think we've been able to do the last couple of years, we need data and we need stories. So if there happens to be a resident you're working with, say, that's, you know, on a fixed income and really having specific troubles with some of this legislation, how it's going to affect them, let me know. You can do it through the clerk because that helps us to more effectively communicate the impact of some of this legislation. So with that, thank you, everybody. Thank you. Councilmember Anderson? Nothing for me. Thank you. Councilmember Andrea? I'll try to be brief as well. I'm really excited about Dr. Martin Luther King's celebration Saturday at Jim Ward. And on Monday, we will honor the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The national theme this year is It Starts With Me, Shifting the Cultural Climate Through the Study and Practice of Kinging Nonviolence. And also on January 21st, the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority will be hosting their ninth annual Delta 5K Race for Health. And they're doing it here, I think, for the first time at Plantation Central Park. So I encourage you, especially you runners out there, I'll be walking the 5K. That's at 7 a.m. And, Mayor, is the January 14th Relay 5K, is that, are you aware of that one? I had it on my calendar, but it wasn't 100 percent. Yes. HR has started an initiative. They want everybody participating because what happened was we did the corporate run last year. And everybody said, this is fun, let's do things. Jules Armino, is that how he pronounces it? J.J. J.J. J.J. J.J. is the team captain. We have 46 people signed up to, including Councilmember Horland, starting at 7 a.m. Yeah, there's going to be, yeah, 7 a.m. on the 14th. And then, I guess, Sunday, what did I say? Sunday. Sunday, the 14th, 7 a.m., we have 46 people. The next one would be in February, the run through Central Park, which supports police. And so, we'll see how many we get for there. And then, the corporate run down there. So, HR is happy. There's involvement and everything. And so, it's organic. Eric, you got something related to that or not? I think tonight is the last night to register for the one on the 14th. Yeah, through us. You can register on your own, maybe, and pay on your own after that. But I think through HR, yeah, it's 30, 35 bucks. Thank you. That's all for me. Thank you. Councilmember Reinstein. So, tonight, I've chosen to wear a blue ribbon and the number 96 tonight. And that's because today is day 96 that the hostages have been held in Israel. Sadly to say, we expect that Sunday will mark the 100th day since hostages were kidnapped from Israel. 132 hostages still remain held in tunnels and as human shields in Gaza. That, in addition, there are 25 bodies of hostages that are known to have already been murdered that are being kept and won't be turned over for burial. I wear the number 96 tonight to bring attention to this. As the days go on and our short attention span, we tend to forget that there are babies. One that just turned one years old a week ago that is held as a hostage. So, I bring this to our attention and to the record and ask that all who are so inclined to please keep them in their prayers. If you're on social media, share the truth and support the efforts to bring them home. Thank you. Thank you. Mayor, did you have anything else? I attend a bunch of board meetings, as you know, and I listen to the mayor, but I don't talk to the mayor about some of the things he brought up. So, there is something that he's been bringing up a couple times, and I was going to wait until the next time he brought it up, thinking that eventually it's going to come to the council. The school zone speeding cameras. Yes, sir. What status? Is that something weird? It's going to come to the council? And if not, why? It will come to you because we go through procurement, but I don't think it involves money. Jason, Chief, what do you guys think? Well, hold on a second. Right, so you also get the question of whether it involves money or not, you would like to touch it in terms of debating the policy. Well, I think that there's certainly a quantitative threshold that comes before the council. Right. There's some philosophical things to be discussed as a council. I have no problem with that, sure. Unless you're going to put a big sign on it and say, this is brought to you by Mayor Sordal, not the council. Right, exactly. There's not an expenditure associated with it. It would be more of a revenue source, but we'd be happy to bring it forward as an administrative item. Okay. And what I was saying about the quantitative threshold of it, well, there's a qualitative threshold because, all right, we don't have to put anything, because I understand it's a vendor. They're probably going to install the equipment. They're going to administer the collections of the fine, which I think, Mayor Sordal, you've been saying it's $100. Yeah, the fine's $100, and I think we collect $36? It varies. So we have a number of submittals, and it's going to vary depending on what they're offering. Give them the update. So from a qualitative standpoint, we're going to hit that threshold because residents are going to get hit by that thing. So the whole point of bringing it up is not to necessarily say yes or no on it, but I would hope that we have a discussion so that we can talk about concerns we may have. Because when I think about it. And you guys have tentacles into the public. So the more you guys know, the more involved we have you are. Right. The greater reach we have in educating everybody. And that's pretty damn valuable. The only reason I brought it up tonight was it felt very eminent when you were speaking about it at the AAB meeting on Monday. And I just want to be aware of it so I could talk to the residents about it, because I think there's going to be people have concerns about it. I think some people are going to think it's great. I think that's where we are in our country. I do have a philosophical problem about advocating law enforcement duties. I think there's possibly other ways that we can try to control the speeders in our school zones. I think the intention is good. But as long as we're going to have an opportunity when we get to see all the details. Let them update you on a status, if you don't mind, please. Okay. That we just had a, we just listened. What did we do? We just opened the responses. So I don't have all that data yet, because it was just open. That's fine. But, you know, to put it as an admin item would be beneficial, because part of it. Statutory we're required to do a lot of notification so that y'all can play a part in that. And obviously we welcome y'all's feedback on it as well. Well, I think the whole point of me bringing it up is that I wanted to be able to have a discussion on it. And it just felt very eminent. Let him update you on the timeline, please. Mayor, I don't have the timeline. I was just going to let you know that these tie into our LPRs. Yes. So it's not only at speeding. We control the amount of speed before we issue a citation. So I believe the, I believe it was 10. It has to be. Yeah, a minimum of 10. You're bringing up questions like what is the, what's the sensitivity of it? Is it 15? I don't have any information on it. So is it 15.5? You know, the .5 hits the trigger. So, all right. So you answered one of my questions. Right. All right. So as long as you're saying we're going to have an opportunity to have a discussion about it. Literally, we just had the meeting on the record. We just had all the vendors presented and we had the panel interview the vendors. So we haven't even picked a vendor yet. Once we pick a vendor, I don't think that has to come to council, but I don't mind bringing it anyway. What do you guys think? I agree. I think it was like eight vendors. I think this is something that we should be discussed and voted on, to be honest with you, even though it's not, doesn't have that responsibility of the, of the procurement value and stuff like that. All right. I just want to have a discussion on it beyond the record. Sounds good. Do you mind if I chime in? You look concerned. You look concerned. You look concerned over there. Go ahead, Councilman. I ask you. That had been bothering me, too, that I kind of just went through and I did mention to Jason. Did you, did, is the statute that it's, has to be 10 miles per hour over or more? Yeah, I believe it's got to be 10 over. And we can set it that or more? We also have to do an education period. We can't just put these things up with no notice. Right. You can do all, we can get in all the details because I was, school zones sometimes are never any kids and you could just be going 15 and don't realize you're going 16 or 17. Right. And you're not trying to speed, but you're, it's so barely over. And so then when you told me it was 10, I'm like, okay, cause someone going that far over, they really should be tagged, but barely going as an example. Cause that's the route I use when I come into work and I see people rolling through there well above the speed limit. And, and, and I think this is, we want to be informed about what this is and how, how it's implemented and hopefully have a say in whether or not we should do it or not. Council member, uh, Andrea. Just again, not to, um, belabor the meeting, but, uh, they are also looking at doing the same concept with the school buses. And so that will be the stop sign on the school buses. So that will be forthcoming probably as well. If a driver goes past the stop sign and blows past it, they will have electronic data on there so they can see you by it. Meanwhile, ours are 15 mile per hour in school zone, but we can lower them to five. So that way when they get 10 over them. All right. That was, I was worried about electronic speed trap, but okay. Um, all right. With that, um, excited for the new year. I feel like we've been shot out of the cannon already. So looking to get a lot accomplished serving the city this year. And with that, it is 10, 11 and. And.